vs see how they prooue that they say That they who ordained our Ministers in the beginning of the alteration of Religion had no power so to doe thus they prooue No Bishop may be esteemed and taken as lawfully ordained vnlesse he be ordained of three Bishops at the least and they such as haue beene ordained in like sort and so ascending till we come to the first whom the Apostles did constitute by their Apostolike authority receiued immediatly from Christ the Sonne of God whom the Father sent into the world But the Pastors and Bishops of the reformed Churches had no such ordination therefore they wanted that calling which should make them lawfull Bishops and Pastours It is true that the auncient Canons regularly admit no ordination as lawfull wherein three Bishops at the least doe not concurre But Bellarmine and his fellowes doe not thinke this number of Bishops imposing hands to bee absolutely and essentially necessary For they confesse that by dispensation growing out of due and just consideration of the present occasions and state of things one Bishop alone may ordain assisted with Abbots which are but Presbyters and no Bishops nay which by the course of their profession and originall of their order are lesse interessed in the government of the Church than the meanest Presbyter hauing care of soules Monachus plangentis non docentis officium habet A Monke is a mourner hee is no teacher in the Church of GOD. The Romanists thinking therefore that in some cases the ordination which is made by one Bishoppe alone assisted with Presbyters is lawfull and good cannot generally except against the ordination of the Bishops and Pastours of all reformed Churches For in England Denmarke and some other places they which had beene Bishoppes in the former corrupt state of the Church did ordaine Bishops and Ministers though perhaps precisely three did not alwayes concurre in euery particular ordination But they will say whatsoeuer may bee thought of these places wherein Bishoppes did ordaine yet in many other none but Presbyters did impose handes all which ordinations are clearely voyde and so by consequent many of the pretended reformed Churches as namely those of France and others haue no ministerie at all The next thing therefore to be examined is whether the power of ordination bee so essentially annexed to the order of Bishops that none but Bishops may in any case ordaine For the clearing whereof we must obserue that the whole Ecclesiasticall power is aptly divided into the power of order and jurisdiction Ordo est rerum parium dispariumque vnicuique sua loca tribuens congrua dispositio that is Order is an apt disposing of things whereof some are greater and some lesser some better and some meaner sorting them accordingly into their seuerall ranckes and places First therefore order doth signifie that mutuall reference or relation that things sorted into their seuerall ranckes and places haue betweene themselues Secondly that standing which each thing obtaineth in that it is better or worse greater or lesser then another and so accordingly sorted and placed aboue or below other in the orderly disposition of things The power of holy or Ecclesiasticall order is nothing else but that power which is specially giuen to men sanctified and set apart from others to performe certaine sacred supernaturall and eminent actions which others of another rancke may not at all or not ordinarily meddle with As to preach the word administer the Sacraments and the like The next kind of Ecclesiasticall power is that of Iurisdiction For the more distinct and full vnderstanding whereof wee must note that three things are implyed in the calling of Ecclesiasticall Ministers First an election choyce or designement of persons fitte for so high and excellent imployment Secondly the consecrating of them and giuing them power and authority to intermeddle with things pertaining to the seruice of God to performe eminent actes of gracious efficacie and admirable force tending to the procuring of the eternall good of the sonnes of men and to yeeld vnto them whome Christ hath redeemed with his most precious blood all the comfortable meanes assurances and helpes that may set forward their eternall saluation Thirdly the assigning and diuiding out to each man thus sanctified to so excellent a worke that portion of Gods people which hee is to take care of who must be directed by him in things that pertaine to the hope of eternall saluation This particular assignation giueth to them that had only the power of order before the power of Iurisdiction also ouer the persons of men Thus then it is necessary that the people of God bee sorted into seuerall portions and the sheepe of Christ diuided into seuerall flockes for the more orderly guiding of them yeelding to them the meanes assurances and helpes that may set them forward in the way of eternall life and that seuerall men bee seuerally and specially assigned to take the care and ouersight of seuerall flocks and portions of Gods people The Apostles of Christ and their successours when they planted the Churches so diuided the people of God conuerted by their minsterie into particular Churches that each Citty and the places neere adioyning did make but one Church Now because the vnity and peace of each particular Chuch of God and flock of his sheepe dependeth on the vnity of the Pastour and yet the necessities of the many duties that are to bee performed in Churches of so large extent require more Ecclesiasticall Ministers then one therefore though there bee many Presbyters that is many fatherly guides of one Church yet there is one amongst the rest that is specially Pastor of the place who for distinction sake is named a Bishop to whom an eminent and peerelesse power is giuen for the avoiding of Schismes and factions and the râ—…st are but his assistants and coadiutours and named by the generali name of Presbyters So that in the performance of the acts of Ecclesiasticall Ministry when he is present and will do them himselfe they must giue place and in his absence or when being present hee needeth assistance they may doe nothing without his consent and liking Yea so farre for orders sake is he preferred before the rest that some things are specially reserued to him onely as the ordaining of such as should assist him in the worke of his ministerie the reconciling of Penitents confirmation of such as were baptised by imposition of hands dedication of Churches and such like These being the diuerse sorts and kinds of Ecclesiasticall power it will easily appeare to all them that enter into the due consideration thereof that the power of Ecclesiasticall or sacred order that is the power and authority to intâ—…ddle with things pertaining to the seruice of God and to performe emiâ—…t actes of gracious efficacie tending to the procuring of the eternall good of thâ—… sonnâ—…s of men is equall and the same in all those whom we call Presbyters
that is fatherly guides of Gods Church and people that only for orders sake and the preseruation of peace there is a limitation of the vse and exercise of the same Heerevnto agree all the best learned amongst the Romanists themselues freely confessing that that wherein a Bishop excelleth a Presbyter is â—…t a distinct higher order or power of order but a kind of dignity office 〈◊〉 imployment onely Which they proue because a Presbyter ordained persaltum that neuer was consecrated or ordained Deacon may notwithstanding doe all those actes that pertaine to the Deacons order because the higher order doth alwaies imply in it the lower and inferiour in an eminent and excellent sort But a Bishoppe ordained per saltum that neuer had the ordination of a Presbyter can neither consecrate and administer the sacrament of the Lords body nor ordaine a Presbyter himselfe being none nor doe any acte peculiarly pertaining to Presbyters Whereby it is most euident that that wherein a Bishoppe excelleth a Presbyter is not a distinct power of order but an eminencie and dignity onely specially yeelded to one aboue all the rest of the same ranke for order sake and to preserue the vnitie and peace of the Church Hence it followeth that many things which in some cases Presbyters may lawfully doe are peculiarly reserued vnto Bishops as Hierome noteth Potius ad honorem Sacerdotij quam ad legis necessitatem Rather for the honour of their Ministery then the necessity of any lawe And therefore wee reade that Presbyters in some places and at some times did impose hands and confirme such as were baptized which when Gregory Bishop of Rome would wholly haue forbidden there was soe great exception taken to him for it that he left it free againe And who knoweth not that all Presbyters in cases of necessity may absolue reconcile Penitents a thing in ordinary course appropriated vnto Bishops and why not by the same reason ordaine Presbyters Deacons in cases of like necessity For seing the cause why they are forbidden to do these acts is because to Bishops ordinarily the care of all churches is committed and to them in all reason the ordination of such as must serue in the Church pertaineth that haue the chiefe care of the Church and haue Churches wherein to imploy them which only Bishops haue as long as they retaine their standing and not Presbyters being but assistants to bishops in their Churches If they become enmies to God and true religion in case of such necessity as the care and gouerment of the Church is deuolued to the Presbyters remaining Catholique being of a better spirit so the duty of ordaining such as are to assist or succeede them in the work of the Ministrie pertaines to them likewise For if the power of order and authority to intermedle in things pertaining to Gods seruice bee the same in all Presbyters and that they be limited in the execution of it onely for order sake so that in case of necessity euery of theÌ„ may baptise confirme them whom they haue baptized absolue reconcile Penitents doe all those other acts which regularly are appropriated vnto the Bishop alone there is no reason to be giuen but that in case of necessity wherein all Bishops were extinguished by death or being fallen into heresie should refuse to ordaine any to serue God in his true worship but that Presbyters as they may do all other acts whatsoeuer speciall challenge Bishoppes in ordinary course make vnto them might do this also Who then dare condemn all those worthy Ministers of God that were ordained by Presbyters in sundry Churches of the world at such times as Bishops in those parts where they liued opposed themselues against the truth of God and persecuted such as professed it Surely the best learned in the Church of Rome in former times durst not pronounce all ordinations of this nature to bee void For not onely Armachanus a very learned and worthy Bishop but as it appeareth by Alexander of Hales many learned men in his time and before were of opinion that in some cases and at some times Presbyters may giue orders and that their ordinations are of force though to do so not being vrged by extreame necessity cannot be excused from ouer great boldnesse and presumption Neither should it seeme so strange to our aduersaries that the power of ordination should at some times be yeelded vnto Presbyters seeing their Chorepiscopi Suffragans or Titular Bishops that liue in the Diocesse and Churches of other Bishops and are no Bishops according to the old course of discipline do dayly in the Romish Church both confirme Children and giue orders All that may be alledged out of the Fathers for proofe of the contrary may be reduced to two heads For first whereas they make all such ordinations voide as are made by Presbyters it is to bee vnderstood according to the strictnesse of the Canons in vse in their time and not absolutely in the nature of the thing which appeares in that they likewise make all ordinations sine titulo to be voide All ordinations of Bishops ordained by fewer then three Bishops with the Metropolitane all ordinations of Presbyters by Bishoppes out of their owne Churches without speciall leaue whereas I am well assured the Romanists will not pronounce any of these to be voide though the parties so doing are not excusable from all fault Secondly their sayings are to bee vnderstood regularly not without exception of some speciall cases that may fall out Thus then we see that obiection which our adnersaries tooke to bee vnanswerable is abundantly answered out of the grounds of their owne Schoole-men the opinion of many singularly learned amongst them and their owne daily practise in that Chorepiscopi or Suffragans as they call them being not Bishops but onely Presbyters whatsoeuer they pretend and forbidden by all old Canons to meddle in ordination yet doe daily with good allowance of the Romane Church ordaine Presbyters and Deacons confirme with imposition of hands those that are baptized and doe all other Episcopall acts whiles their great Bishops Lord it like princes in all temporall ease and worldly bravery The next thing they object against vs is that our first Ministers what authority soeuer they had that ordained them yet had no lawfull ordination because they were not ordained placed in voide places but intruded into Churches that had lawfull Bishops at the time of those pretended ordinations and consequently did not succeede but encroach vpon other mens right To this wee answere that the Church is left voyde either by the death resignation depriuation or the peoples desertion and forsaking of him that did precede In some places our first Bishoppes and Pastours found the Churches voydby death in some by voluntarie relinquishment in some by depriuation and in some by desertion in that the people or at least that part of the
proued and all confesse but that what hee gaue to others it did so passe vnto them as that in the first place it was giuen to Peter and hee thereby set in order and honour before the rest put in the same commission with him so that Peter receiued not a different or more large commission from Christ then the other Apostles but onely a kinde of honourable precedence preëminence and priority such as the Duke of Venice hath amongst the great Lords of that state to whom all Embassies and messages are directed from forreine Princes and in whose name all letters warrants and mandates are sent out as representing the whole State yet can hee doe nothing without the rest nor crosse the consenting resolution of those noble Senators And in this sense it is that Augustine saith of Peter that he was by nature one particular man by grace a christian man by more ample and abundant grace a chiefe Apostle but that when hee receiued the Keyes hee represented the whole vniuersall Church not as a legate that representeth the person of his Prince and receiueth honours dignities and titles for him and not for himselfe but as chiefe of the company of the Apostles receiuing for himselfe in the first place that which in him and together with him was intended to them all This primacie of honour and order found in blessed Peter who is therevpon named by the Fathers Prince and head of the Apostles is the originall of all that superiority that Metropolitanes haue ouer the Bishops of their prouinces and Primates and Patriarches ouer Metropolitanes and in a word of all that order that is in the Church and amongst her guides whereby vnitie is preserued CHAP. 25. Of the distinction of them to whom the Apostles dying left the managing of Church affaires and particularly of them that are to performe the meaner seruices in the Church HAuing spoken of the Apostles power and office and the largenesse of that commission it remaineth that wee come to speake of them to whom they recommended the managing of Church affaires and the ministerie of holy things when they left the world They to whom they recommended the care of these things when hauing finished their course they were called hence to receiue the Crowne laid vp for them in Heauen were of two sorts first such as they trusted with the ministerie of the Word and Sacraments and government of Gods people and secondly such other as they appointed to be assistant to them and to performe the meaner seruices though necessary also The former sort are all comprehended vnder one common name of Presbyters that is fatherly guides of Gods Church and people the latter are Deacons and such other inferiour Ministers as attend the necessities of the Saints and assist the principal Guides of the Church In the ordination of a Presbyter saith Durandus there is a certaine power conferred on him and assigning of him to an employment whereby after his ordination hee may doe something which hee could not haue done before etiam quoad genus facti no not in the kinde and nature of the thing it selfe as hee that is ordained a Presbyter may consecrate the Lords Body and absolue in the Court of Penitencie neither of which things without such ordination can be done but to them that are in the inferiour orders there is no power giuen neither haue they any assignement to doe any thing which they could not doe before and without such ordination but to doe such things as they could not lawfully doe nay in many of them there is no designement of them that are so ordained to the performance of any thing but that which according to the vse of the vniuersall Church men without such ordination may lawfully doe So that the ordination of men to the performance of such things and the execution of such offices seemeth to haue proceeded from the institution of the Church for the greater solemnitie of Diuine worship and seruice and therefore such inferiour orders are neither simply orders order being a sacred signe or character by vertue whereof a power is giuen to the ordained not onely to doe that hee could not otherwise lawfully doe but to doe that which otherwise hee could not doe at all neither are they Sacraments but Sacramentall solemnities onely seeing the Church can institute no Sacraments Hitherto Durandus These being the sorts of them to whom the Apostles recommended the managing of Church affaires and this the difference of their orders I will first speak of the diuers orders degrees of them that performe the meaner seruices in the Church and then come to speake of them that haue the gouernement of the Church The Master of Sentences saith that the order of Subdeacons and other minor orders below the degree of Deacons as Acoluthes Exorcists Lectors Ostiaries were brought in by the Church and that they were not in the Apostles times and Thomas Aquinas and other are of the same minde Notwithstanding there is no question but these minor orders and degrees were very ancient For Cyprian maketh mention of one Mettius a Subdeacon and Nicephorus an Acoluthe In another place hee writeth that he had ordained Aurelius and Celerinus Lectors and in a third place hee mentioneth Exorcists and Lectors Cornelius Bishop of Rome in his Epistle recorded by Eusebius describing the Clergie of the Romane Church in his time sheweth that there were in the same 46 Presbyters 7 Deacons 7 Subdeacōs 42 Acoluthes 52 Exorcists Lectors Ostiaries Widowes with distressed people more then 1500. Ignatius in his Epistle to the Antiochians omitting Acoluthes reckoneth the rest as Subdeacons Lectors Ostiaries and Exorcists adding to them Cantores and Laborantes or Copiatae whose imployment was to bury the dead of whom also Epiphanius speaketh Whereupon Bishop Lindan sayth that howsoeuer in these times they make or account but seauen orders yet in the Primitiue Church there were more now scarce knowen But let vs see what the office employment and manner of the admission of these men was in former times Touching Ostiaries the Councell of Carthage ordayneth thus Let the Ostiary after he hath beene instructed by the Arch-deacon how to behaue himselfe in the house of God at the suggestion of the Arch-deacon be ordained and let the Bishop take the Keyes frō the Altar and giue them to him saying So demeane thy selfe as being to giue an accoūt to God for the things that these Keyes locke vp The Lectors were to reade in the Church whatsoeuer was to be read out of the old or new Testament whereupon Cyprian hauing ordained Aurelius the confessour a Lector giueth a reason why he had so done Quia nihil magis congruit voci quae Dominum gloriosa praedicatione confessa est quam celebrandis diuinis Lectionibus personare that is Because nothing doth more fitte or better beseeme the voyce that by a glorious publique testimony hath
contrary side there are so many examples proposed that it ought not so to be done With Clemens Alexandrinus and Optatus Hierome agreeth who vpon the 44. of Ezekiel saith in expresse words that Priests must neither nourish their haire nor be shaued but so polled that their skinne may still remaine hid and couered and Bellarmine himselfe confesseth that Dionysius Epiphanius Hierome Athanafius Palladius Augustine Isidore Bede and the Councels of Carthage Toledo doe speake of tonsure onely and neuer mention rasure and that the Epistle of Anicetus the Pope alledged for rasure is not indubitate What then will the Cardinall bring for defence of the contrary custome now prevayling in the Church of Rome and what will he answer to these authorities of the ancient We reprehend not saith he the customes of those times neither do they of those times condemne our obseruation For howsoeuer tonsure and not rasure was anciently vsed yet were not they of the Clergie forbidden to vse rasure or to shaue their heads A strange answer of so great a Rabbi and contrary to that he knoweth to be vndoubtedly true For Optatus directly condemneth rasure as wee haue heard and Hierome writing vpon the 44 of Ezekiel hath these words Quod autem sequitur Caput autem suū non radent neque comam nutrient sed tondentes attondebunt capita sua perspicuè demonstratur nec rasis capitibus sicut Sacerdotes cultoresque Isidis atque Serapis nos esse debere nec rursum comam dimittere quod propriè luxuriosorum est barbarorumque militantium c. That is that which followeth They shall not shaue their heads nor let their haire grow long but polling they shall polle their heads doeth clearely demonstrate that wee should neither shaue our heads like the Priests and worshippers of Isis and Serapis nor on the other side let our haire grow long as wantons barbarous men and Souldiers are wont to doe that that which is fitting honest and seemely may appeare in the faces of the Priests The Septnagint reade the wordes of the Prophet somewhat otherwise in this sort They shall not shaue their heads nor cut their haire too neere sed operientes operient capitasua that is but hiding they shall hide their heads whereby wee learne that wee must neither make our selues bald by shauing nor cut the haire of our heads so neere as if wee were shauen but let our haire grow so that the skinne may be hid couered These are the words of Hierome whereby it appeareth that the absurd and ridiculous ceremony of the Romanists in shauing the heads of those of their Clergie is condemned by the Fathers and that Bellarmine speaketh against his owne conscience when hee sayth the contrary Wherefore ceasing any longer to insist vpon the refutation of the absurditie of so ridiculous a ceromonie and leauing those inferiour orders and degrees of Ministerie in the Church of God wherein men in auncient times were trained vp vnder the rules of strict and seuere gouernment discipline and fitted for higher and greater employments let vs come to the office of the Deacons The office of Bishops Presbyters was from Christs owne immediate institution but the institution of Deacons was from the Apostles as Cyprian deliuereth These the Bishop alone may ordaine neither is it necessarie that other impose their hands with him as in the ordination of Presbyters seeing they are consecrated onely to bee assistants to the Bishop Presbyters not admitted into the fellowship of the same power and order with them The Deacons according to the intendment of their first institution were to take care of the poore and the treasure of the Church and therevpon Chrysostome and after him the Fathers of the sixth generall Councell doe thinke they were not the same wee now haue ours being busied in other affaires of the Church But I am of opinion that they were the same and that the end of their first institution being principally to ease the Apostles of the care of prouiding for the poore and to take the charge of the Church-treasure when the treasure of the Church encreasing was committed to certaine Stewards and the poore otherwise provided for they were more specially vsed for the assisting of the Bishoppe and Presbyters in things pertaining to Gods seruice and worship Whereupon wee shall finde in some cases they might baptize reconcile penitents preach and doe sundry other things pertaining to the office of the Bishop and Presbyters That in some cases they might baptize u Tertullian witnesseth That they might reconcile penitents wee haue the authoritie of Saint Cyprian That they might preach wee haue the testimony of Saint z Gregory And that they assisted the Bishops and Presbyters in ministring the Sacrament of the Lords body and bloud and ministred the cup it appeareth by Cyprian And hereupon Hierome amplifieth the dignity of them exceedingly shewing that for avoyding presumption the Presbyters may not take the cup of the Lord from the holy Table vnlesse it be deliuered vnto them by the Deacons These are they saith hee of whom we reade in the Revelation Septem Angeli Ecclesiarum hi sunt septem candelabra aurea hi sunt voces tonitruorum virtutum operatione praeclari humilitate praediti quieti Euangelizantes pacem annunciantes bona dissentiones rixas scandala resecare docentes soli Deo colloquentes in templo nihil penitus de mundo cogitantes dicentes Patri Matri non noui vos filios suos non agnoscentes Sine his Sacerdos nomen non habet ortum non habet officium non habet that is These are the seauen Angels of the Churches these are the seauen golden Candlestickes these are the voyces of the thunders these are renowned for the operation of vertues humble quiet preaching peace publishing good things teaching how to cut away dissentions brawles and scandals communing with God alone in his holy temple hauing no thought of the world saying to Father and Mother I know you not and not acknowledging their own sons without these the priest hath not the name not the beginning not the office of a Priest And a litle after he addeth Sacerdotibus etiam propter praesumptionem non licet de mensa Domini calicem tollere nisi eis traditus fuerit à Diaconis Leuitae componunt mensam Domini Leuitae Sacerdotibus cum Sacramenta benedicunt assistunt Leuitae ante Sacerdotes orant vt aures habeamus ad Dominum Diaconus acclamat that is Euen the Priests themselues for the auoiding of presumption must not take the holy cup from off the Table of the Lord vnlesse it be deliuered to them by the Deacons The Deacons or Leuites prepare the Table of the Lord and make all things ready on the same The Leuites assist the Priests when they blesse and sanctifie the sacramentall elements The Leuites pray before the Priests The Deacon crieth out aloud vnto vs to open our eares and
one should beebefore and aboue the rest without whom the rest should do nothing and to whom some things should bee peculiarly reserued as the dedicating of Churches reconciling of penitents confirming of the baptized and the ordination of such as are to serue in the worke of the Ministerie Of which the three former were reserued to the Bishop alone Potiùs ad honorem Sacerdotii quam ad legis necessitatem that is rather to honour his priestly and Bishoply place then for that these things at all may not be done by any other And therefore wee reade that at some times and in some cases of necessitie Presbyters did reconcile penitents and by imposition of hands confirme the baptized But the ordaining of men to serue in the worke of the Ministerie is more properly reserued to them For seeing none are to be ordained at randome but to serue in some Church and none haue Churches but Bishops all other being but assistants to them in their Churches none may ordaine but they onely vnlesse it bee in cases of extreme necessitie as when all Bishops are extinguished by death or fallen into heresie obstinately refuse to ordaine men to preach the Gospell of Christ sincerely And then as the care and charge of the Church is devolued to the Presbyters remaining Catholique so likewise the ordaining of men to assist them and succeede them in the worke of the Ministery But hereof I haue spoken at large elsewhere Wherefore to conclude this point we see that the best learned amongst the Schoolemen are of opinion that Bishops are no greater then presbyters in the power of consecration or order but onely in the exercise of it and in the power of Iurisdiction with whom Stapleton seemeth to agree saying expressely that Quoad ordinem Sacerdotalem ea quae sunt ordinis that is In respect of Sacerdotall order and the things that pertaine to order they are equall and that therefore in all administration of Sacraments which depend of order they are all equall potestate though not exercitio that is in power though not in the execution of things to be done by vertue of that power whence it will follow that ordination being a kinde of Sacrament and so depending of the power of order in the judgement of our Adversaries might bee ministred by presbyters but that for the avoyding of such horrible confusions scandals and schismes as would follow vpon such promiscuous ordinations they are restrained by the decree of the Apostles and none permitted to doe any such thing except it bee in case of extreme necessitie but Bishops who haue the power of order in common together with presbyters but yet so as that they excell them in the execution of things to bee done by vertue of that power and in the power of Iurisdiction also But Bellarmine sayth the Catholique Church acknowledgeth and teacheth that the degree of Bishops is greater then that of Presbyters by Gods Law as well in the power of order as jurisdiction addeth that the Schoole-men vpon the fourth of the Sentences defend the same and Thomas in his Summe which yet elsewhere he confesseth to be vntrue This his opinion he endeauoureth to confirme because none but Bishoppes doe ordaine and if they doe their ordinations are judged voyde which they could not be by the Churches prohibition or decree of the Apostles if they were equall in the power of order to Bishops Hereunto I haue answered elsewhere shewing that ordinations at large or sine titulo and ordinations in another mans charge by bishops who by the character of their order may ordaine are likewise pronounced to be voide by the ancient canons and that therefore the prohibition of the Church and decree of the Apostles for the auoyding of confusion and schisme reseruing the honour of ordaining to Bishops onely vnlesse it were in the case of extreame necessitie might make the ordinations of all other to be void though equall with them in the power of order CHAP. 28. Of the diuision of the lesser Titles and smaller Congregations or Churches out of those Churches of so large extent founded and constituted by the Apostles HItherto wee haue seene how the Apostles diuiding the Churches in such sort that a whole citty and the places adioyning made but one Church set ouer the same one Bishop as Pastour of the place diuers Presbyters as assistants vnto him But in processe of time we shall find certaine portions of these greater flockes of Christ and Churches of God to haue beene deuided out and distinctly assigned to seuerall Presbyters that were to take the care and charge thereof yet with limitations and reseruations of sundry preeminences to the Bishop as remaining still Pastour of those smaller particular congregations though in a sort deuided and distinguished from that greater Church wherein especially hee made his abode Two words wee find in Antiquie vsed to expresse the flockes of Christ and Churches of God thus deuided for more conuenience and yet still depending on that care of one Pastour or Bishop 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is parish and Diocese The former contained the cittizens and all such borderers as dwelt neare and repaired to any chiefe church or citie though now we vse the word Parish to signifie another thing namely some particular smaller and lesse congregation diuided out from the Mother Church the later which is Diocese both then and now importeth the villages and Churches dispersed in diuers places vnder the regiment of one Bishop The first that began thus to deuide out smaller Churches and congregations out of those great ones first founded and to assigne Presbyters distinctly to take care of thē was Euaristus Bishop of Rome whose example others did follow in al parts of the world These parts of Gods Church thus deuided assigned to the care of seuerall Presbyters were called Tituli that is Titles because God was intituled vnto them did specially claime them as the lot of his inheritance These Titles or smaller Churches and congregations were of diuerse sorts for some were more principall wherein Baptisme might be administred and the like things performed which were thereupon named Baptismall Churches and in respect of meaner in time growing out of them and depending of them Mother Churches also Other there were not hauing so great liberties To such of these Churches as he pleased the Bishop himselfe went and preached one day in one of them and another in another carrying great cōpanies with him drawing great multitudes to him which solemne assēblies meetings were named stations from their standing at prayers vsed in those times and were like the mighty armies of God keeping their watches and standing ready to encounter their furious and dangerous enemies In this sort Gregory the Great went and preached in such Churches in Rome as he thought fit whose Homilies and Sermons then preached are yet extant with the names of
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doe originally signifie that kinde of election which is made by many expressing their consent and giuing their voyces or suffrages by lifting vp of their handes yet may it bee extended more generally to signifie any election of many expressing their consent by writing by liuely voyce or by going to one side of the place where they are yea any choyce whatsoeuer though made by one alone as it appeareth in that the Apostles are said to haue beene witnesses formerly designed and appointed by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 whereas Christ only chose them and they were not elected by the voyces of many or any but himselfe alone And in Ecclesiasticall writers the same word signifieth Ordination that is by Imposition of handes as it were easy to proue by many testimonies of Antiquity CHAP. 56. Of the Ordination of Bishoppes and Ministers FROM the Election of Ministers whereof wee haue sufficiently spoken let vs proceede to their Ordination with which none but the Guides of the Church are trusted And therefore howsoeuer the people may sometimes elect yet they are charged not to lay hands hastily on any man nor to communicate with other mens sinnes So that the moderation of all things in this kinde resteth in them this is all that the Scripture prescribeth touching the designing and appointing of Ministers namely whom and how they that haue power of ordaining must ordaine Ordination is the setting of men a part to the worke of the Ministery the commending of them with fasting and prayer to the grace of God and the authorizing of them to performe things pertayning to God which others without such sanctification neither may nor can doe Wherein the Ceremony of Imposition of handes is vsed First to expresse the setting of them apart for sacred imployment Secondly to let them knowe that the hand of God is with them in all that they doe in his name and by his authority to guide direct strengthen protect them Thirdly to note out the person vpon whom the Church by her prayers desireth the blessings of Almighty God to bee powred in more plentifull sort then vpon others as being to take charge of others This Ordination is either of Bishoppes to whome the care and gouernment of the Church is principally committed or of other inferiour Cleargy-men Touching the Ordination of Bishoppes the Councell of Nice decreeth that a Bishop must be ordained by all the Bishops in the Prouince and that if it seeme hard either in respect of some vrgent necessity or the length of the wayes that they should all meete yet there must bee three at the least to concurre in all such ordinations the rest by their letters testifying their consent and the Metropolitane confirming that they doe The Councell of Antioch in like sort decreeth That a Bishoppe shall not bee ordayned without a Synode and the presence of the Metropolitane That the Metropolitane by his letters shall call vnto him all the Bishops in the Prouince if conveniently they may come together if not that at the least the greater part be present or giue their consent by writing And that if at any time there grow any difference among the Bishoppes of the Prouince about the person that is to bee ordayned the greater part of voyces shall sway all In the Second Councell of Carthage all the Bishops with one consent said It seemeth good to vs all that without consulting the Primate of each Prouince no man easily presume though with many Bishoppes to ordaine a Bishoppe in what place soeuer without his commaund but if necessity shall require that three Bishoppes in what place soeuer they bee with the commaund of the Primate shall haue power to ordaine a Bishoppe And because the concurrence of the Metropolitane was to bee sought and his presence or direction had in euery ordination therefore least by his fault there might be too long and dangerous delayes it was ordered that vnlesse it were in case of necessity all ordinations should bee within three monthes after the voydance of any place and that if by the fault of the Metropolitane there were any longer delay he should be subiect to Ecclesiasticall Censure and punishment In latter times vnder the Papacy they permitted by speciall dispensation one Bishop assisted with two mitred Abbots to ordaine a Bishoppe contrary to all the old Canons requiring three Bishoppes at the least The forme and manner of ordination we finde in the Fourth Councell of Carthage which prescribeth that when a Bishoppe is to bee ordained two Bishops must hold the booke of the Gospels ouer his head and that one powring forth the blessing vpon him all the other Bishoppes that are present must touch his head with their handes This is the forme of Episcopall ordination But touching Presbyters Deacons the Councell of Hispalis saith That the Bishop alone may conferre Ecclesiasticall honour vpon them but that alone he cannot take it from them which yet is not so to bee vnderstood as if the Bishop alone without his Presbyters might ordaine Presbyters but that hee may without the concurrence of other Bishops giue that honour of Presbyteriall order which without them he cannot take away againe For otherwise the Councell of Carthage prouideth that in the ordination of a Presbyter the Bishoppe holding his hand on his head and blessing him all the Presbyters that are present shall holde their handes by the handes of the Bishoppe Whereas in the ordination of a Deacon it sufficeth that the Bishop alone put his hands vpon the head of him that is ordained because he is not sanctified to Priestly dignity but to the seruice of the Church So that other Ministers are to concurre in the ordination of the Ministers of the Word and Sacraments as well as the Bishoppe being equall to him in the power of Order and Ministery and his assistants in the worke of it yet hath the Bishop a great preheminence aboue them in the Imposition of hands For regularly no number of Presbyters imposing hands can make a Minister without the Bishoppe The reason whereof is because no Ordinations are to be made sine titulo that is without title or place of employment and none but Bishops haue Churches wherein to employ men seeing they onely are Pastours of Churches all other are but their assistants and coadiutors not because the power of order which is giuen in Ordination is lesse in them then in Bishops So that Bishops alone haue the power of Ordination and no man may regularly doe it without them Whereupon ordinarily and according to the strictnesse of the old canons all Ordinations made otherwise are pronounced voyde as wee reade of one Coluthus whose ordinations were therefore voyded because he tooke on him to ordaine being no Bishop but a Presbyter onely But seeing Bishops and Presbyters are in the power of order the same as when the Bishops of a whole Church or countrey fall from the Faith
seeing there are alwaies some right-beleeuers but a right iudgment of men by their power of iurisdiction maintaining truth suppressing error may be wanting Nay that somtimes there was no such iudgmēt in the Church it is most euident For Vincentius Lyrinensis sayth the Arian heresie infected not some part onely but almost the whole Christian world soe that almost all the Bishoppes of the Latine Church were misled by force or fraud Yea Athanasius and Hierome report that Liberius Bishoppe of ROME was carryed away in that tempestuous whirlewinde and subscribed to heresie soe that there was noe sette Tribunall on earth in those dayes to the determinations whereof it was safe to stand §. 2. IN the next place the Treatiler chargeth Mee that whereas Luther defendeth that infants in Baptisme actually beleeue I endeauour to wrest his words to habituall faith which sence he sayth Luthers discourses will not admit and for proofe hereof referreth the reader to certaine places in Luther and to the positions of his followers but as Festus sayd vnto Paul thou hast appealed to Caesar to Caesar shalt thou goe so seeing this Treatiser referreth the Reader to Luthers discourses and the doctrine of his Disciples to these I will send him which will turne greatly to the Treatisers disaduantage For the reader cannot but finde by Luthers discourses and the doctrine of his Schollers that I haue rightly deliuered his opinion to bee that infants are filled with habituall fayth when they are regenerate and not that they haue any such acts of faith or knowledge of God as men of yeares haue Let vs therefore heare what Luther himselfe will say some men saith hee will obiect against that which I haue said touching the necessity of faith in such as are to receiue the Sacramērs with profit that infants haue no faith nor apprehension of Gods mercies that therefore either faith is not so necessarily required to the due receiuing of the sacramēt or that infants are Baptised in vaine Here I say that which all say that other mens faith euen the faith of such as present thē to Baptisme steedeth litle children For as the word of God is mightie when the sound therof is heard euen to the changing of the heart of a wicked man which is no lesse vnapt to heare the voyce of God to listen vnto it thē any litle babe so by the prayer of the Church which out of faith to which all thinges are possible presenteth it to baptisme the child is changed cleansed and renued by the infusion of faith or by faith which is infused and powred into it Thus doth Luther expresse his owne meaning touching this poynt Now let vs heare what his followers will say It was agreed vpon saith Chemnitius amongst the followers of Luther that when we say infants beleeue or haue faith wee must not imagine that they do vnderstand or feele the motions of faith But their errour is rejected who suppose that infants baptized please God and are saued without any operation or working of the holy spirit in them whereas Christ pronounceth that vnlesse a man bee borne a new of water and of the spirit hee cannot enter into the kingdome of heauen So that this is all that Luther and the rest meant that children cannot be made partakers of those benefits that God offereth to men in Baptisme nor inherit eternall life by vertue of the faith of the Church without some change wrought in them by the spirit fitting them to be joyned to God which change or alteration in them they call faith not meaning to attribute vnto them an actuall apprehension of Gods mercies for they constantly deny that they feele any such motions of faith but a kinde of habituall faith onely there being nothing in faith but such an act of beleeuing as they deny or the seede roote and habit whence actual motions in due time do flow With whom Calvine agreeth for whereas the Anabaptists obiect against him defending that infants are capable of regeneration that the Scripture mentioneth no regeneration but by the incorruptible seed of the word of God which infants cannot heare he answereth that God by his diuine power may renue and change them by some other meanes Secondly hee addeth that it is not absurde to thinke that God doth shine into the hearts of those infants which in infancie hee calleth out of this world to himselfe and that hee doth make himselfe knowne vnto them in some sorte seeing they are presently after to be receiued and admitted to the cleare and open view and sight of his glorious face and countenance and yet saith he will not rashly affirme that they are indued with the same faith which wee finde in our selues or that they haue knowledge like vnto that of faith And in the next section speaking more generally and not restraining himselfe to such as die in infancy hee saith that they are Baptized into future repentance and faith which vertues though they bee not presently formed in them yet a seede of either of them lieth hid in them The Papists are distracted into contrary opinions touching this point For some thinke that grace the roote of faith and other vertues is infused into children in Baptisme but not faith other that not onely grace but the habit of faith hope and charity is powred into them likewise which opinion as more probable was admitted in the Councell of Vienna and is embraced by vs as true Wherefore let the Reader judge whether I haue wrested the words of Luther or the Treatiser wronged Mee SECT 3. IN the third place hee laboureth to demonstrate and proue that there is a contradiction betweene the reuerend Bishop of Lincolne and Doctour Morton my selfe touching the power of ordination which that learned Bishoppe appropriateth vnto Bishops and we communicate in some cases to Presbyters But this silly obiection is easily answered for his meaning is that none but Bishoppes regularly may ordaine which we confesse to be true as likewise none but they onely may confirme the baptized by imposition of hands and yet thinke that in case of necessity Presbyters may performe both these things though of ordinary right belonging to Bishops only Part. 1. Sect. 1. LEt vs passe therefore from the preface to the booke it selfe the first thing that he objecteth in the booke it selfe is that I giue Apostolicke power to the present Church whence he thinketh it may be inferred that the Church cannot erre in matters of faith or ceremonies That I giue Apostolique power to the present church he endeavoureth to proue because I say She hath authority to dispense with some constitutions of the Apostles touching order and comelinesse which he thinketh She might not doe if she had not the same Authority by force whereof they were made but he could not but know that this proofe is too weake if he were not very weake in vnderstanding For the Apostles made these constitutions
leaders which they follow the Bees haue their King the Cranes fly after one in order like an Alphabet of letters there is but one Emperour one Iudge of a Prouince Rome newly built could not endure two brethren to bee Kings together and therefore was dedicated in parricide Esau Iacob were at warre in the wombe of Rebeccah euery Church hath her owne Bishop her owne Arch-presbyter her owne chiefe Deacon and all Ecclesiasticall order consisteth herein that some doe rule and direct the rest In a shippe there is but one that directeth the helme In a house or family there is but one master And to conclude in an armie if it be neuer so great yet the direction of one Generall is expected Thus then all confesse that there alwayes hath beene and must be in each Church a preëminence of one aboue the rest of the Presbyters of the same but some thinke this preëminence should be onely a priority of order in sitting before in propounding things to be thought of and in moderating the whole action of deliberation and that all things should be swayed by voyces the President or Bishop hauing no voyce negatiue or affirmatiue but as the maior part shall direct him Likewise this presidencie they thinke should bee but annuall or to end with the action about which they meete whether it be to determine a doubt to ordaine a Minister or to doe any other such like thing This new conceipt wee cannot approue of because wee finde no patterne of any such Bishop or President in all antiquity But the Fathers describe vnto vs such a Bishop as hath eminent and peerelesse power without whose consent the Presbyters canne doe nothing Hence haue heresies sprung and schismes arisen sayth Cyprian because one Priest in the Church is not acknowledged for the time to bee Iudge in Christs steed to whom if all the brethren would be subiect according to the diuine directions no man would after the diuine iudgements after the suffrages of the people after the consent of other Bishops make himselfe Iudge not of the Bishop but of God Let the Presbyter saith Ignatius doe nothing without the Bishop The Bishop saith Hierome must haue an eminent and peerelesse power or else there will be as many schismes in the Church as there are Priests And Tertullian sheweth that without the Bishops leaue and consent no Presbyter may baptize minister any Sacrament or doe any ministeriall act So that it is most cleare and euident that the Bishop in each Church is aboue and before the rest of the Presbyters of the same not in order onely but in degree also and power of Iurisdiction Yet on the other side we make not the power of Bishops to be Princely as Bellarmine doth but Fatherly so that as the Presbyters may doe nothing without the Bishop so he may doe nothing in matters of greatest moment and consequence without their presence and aduice Wherevpon the Councell of Carthage voideth all sentences of Bishops which the presence of their Clergie confirmeth not and euen vnto this day they haue no power to alienate lands and to doe some such like things without the concurrence and consent of the Presbyters of the Cathedrall and great Church It is therefore most false that Bellarmine hath that Presbyters haue no power of Iurisdiction and the proofe he bringeth of this his assertion most weake when he alledgeth that all Councels both generall and prouinciall wherein Iurisdiction is most properly exercised were celebrated and holden by Bishops as if Presbyters had had nothing to doe therein For it is most cleare and euident that in all prouinciall Synodes Presbyters did sit giue voyce and subscribe as well as Bishops And howsoeuer in generall councels none did giue voyce but Bishops alone yet those Bishops that were present bringing the resolution and consent of the prouinciall Synodes of those Churches from whence they came in which Synodes Presbyters had their voyces they had a kinde of consent to the decrees of generall Councells also and nothing was passed in them without their concurrence Thus were things moderated in the primitiue ages of the Church and though Bishops had power ouer Presbyters yet was it so limited that there was nothing bitter or grieuous in it nothing but that which was full of sweetnesse and content For if any difference grew betweene the Bishop and his Presbyters the Presbyters might not iudge their Bishop whom they were to acknowledge to be a Iudge in Christs stead but an appeale lay vnto a prouinciall Synode to which not onely the Bishops of the prouinces were to come but a certaine number of Presbyters also out of each Church to sit as Iudges of such differences Neither might the Bishop of himselfe alone depriue degrade or put from their office and dignity the Presbyters and Deacons of his Church but if there were any matter concerning a Presbyter he was to joyne vnto him fiue other Bishops of the prouince and if any matter concerning a Deacon two other Bishops before he might proceede to giue sentence against Presbyter or Deacon The causes of other inferiour Cleargie-men the Bishop might heare and determine himselfe alone without the concurrence and presence of other Bishops but not without the concurrence of his owne Cleargie without whose presence no sentence of the Bishop was of force but judged and pronounced voide by the canon Touching the preheminence of Bishops aboue Presbyters there is some difference among the Schoole-Diuines For the best learned amongst them are of opinion that Bishops are not greater then Presbyters in the power of consecration or order but only in the exercise of it and in the power of Iurisdiction seeing Presbyters may preach and minister the greatest of all Sacraments by vertue of their consecration and order as well as Bishops Touching the power of consecration or order saith Durandus it is much doubted of among Diuines whether any be greater therein then an ordinarie Presbyter For Hierome seemeth to haue beene of opinion that the highest power of consecration or order is the power of a Priest or elder so that euery Priest in respect of his priestly power may minister all Sacraments confirme the baptized giue all orders all blessings and consecrations but that for the avoiding of the perill of schisme it was ordained that one should be chosen who should bee named a Bishop to whom the rest should obey and to whom it was reserued to giue orders and to doe some such other things as none but Bishops doe And afterwards hee saith that Hierome is clearely of this opinion not making the distinction of Bishops from Presbyters a meere humane invention or a thing not necessary as Aerius did but thinking that amongst them who are equall in the power of order and equally enabled to doe any sacred act the Apostles for the avoyding of schisme and confusion and the preseruation of vnity peace and order ordained that in each Church
and the two first kindes thereof 432. Chap. 14. Of the third kind of communication of properties and the first degree thereof 434. Chap. 15. Of the third kind of communication of properties and the second degree thereof 438. Chap. 16. Of the worke of Mediation performed by Christ in our nature 441. Chap. 17. Of the things which Christ suffered for vs to procure our reconciliation with God 445. Chap 18. Of the nature and quality of the passion and suffering of Christ. 450. Chap. 19. Of the descending of Christ into hell 453. Chap. 20. Of the merit of Christ of his not meriting for himselfe his meriting for vs. 464. Chap. 21. Of the benefites which we receiue from Christ. 469. Chap. 22. Of the Ministery of them to whom Christ committed the publishing of the reconciliation between God and men procured by him 471. Chap. 23. Of the Primacie of power imagined by our Aduersaries to haue beene in Peter and their defence of the same 479. Chap. 24. Of the preeminence that Peter had amongst the Apostles and the reason why Christ directed his speeches specially to him 486. Chap. 25. Of the distinction of them to whom the Apostles dying left the managing of Church-affaires and particularly of them that are to performe the meaner seruices in the Church 488. Chap. 26. Of the orders and degrees of them that are trusted with the Ministery of the word and Sacraments and the gogouernment of Gods people and particularly of Lay-elders falsely by some supposed to bee Gouernours of the Church 493. Chap. 27. Of the distinction of the power of Order and Iurisdiction and the preeminence of one amongst the Presbyters of each Church who is named a Bishop 497. Chap. 28. Of the diuision of the lesser titles and smaller Congregations or Churches out of those Churches of so large extent founded and constituted by the Apostles 501. Chap. 29. Of Chorepiscopi or Rurall Bishops forbidden by old Canons to encroach vpon the Episcopall office and of the institution necessary vse of Archpresbyters or Deanes 504. Chap. 30. Of the forme of the gouernement of the Church and the institution and authority of Metropolitanes and Patriarches 510. Chap. 31. Of Patriarches who they were and the reason why they were preferred before other Bishops 515. Chap. 32. How the Pope succeedeth Peter what of right belongeth to him and what it is that he vniustly claimeth 518. Chap. 33. Of the proofes brought by the Romanists for confirmation of the vniuersality of the Popes iurisdiction and power 521. Chap. 34. Of the pretended proofes of the Popes vniuersall iurisdiction taken out of the decretall Epistles of Popes 524. Chap. 35. Of the pretended proofes of the Popes Supremacie produced and brought out of the writinges of the Greeke Fathers 533. Chap. 36. Of the pretended proofes of the Popes Supremacie taken out of the writings of the Latine Fathers 539. Chap. 37. Of the pretended proofes of the Popes vniuersall power taken from his intermedling in ancient times in confirming deposing or restoring Bishops deposed 550. Chap. 38. Of the weakenesse of such proofes of the supreame power of Popes as are taken from their lawes Censures dispensations and the Vicegerents they had in places farre remote from them 556. Chap. 39. Of Appeales to Rome 561. Chap. 40. Of the Popes supposed exemption from all humane iudgment as beeing reserued to the iudgement of Christ onely 571. Chap. 41. Of the titles giuen to the Pope and the insufficiencie of the proofes of his illimited power and iurisdiction taken from them 582. Chap. 42. Of the second supposed priuiledge of the Romane Bishops which is infallibility of iudgement 585. Chap. 43. Of such Popes as are charged with heresie and how the Romanists seeke to cleare them from that imputation 593. Chap. 44. Of the Popes vniust claime of temporall dominion ouer the whole world 602. Chap. 45. Of the Popes vniust claime to intermedle with the affaires of Princes and their States if not as Soueraign Lord ouer all yet at least in ordine ad Spiritualia and in case of Princes failing to do their duties 609. Chap. 46. Of the examples of Church-men deposing Princes brought by the Romanists 618. Chap. 47. Of the ciuill dominion which the Popes haue by the gift of Princes 632. Chap. 48. Of generall Councels and of the end vse and necessity of them 642. Chap. 49. Of the persons that may be present in generall Councels and who they are of whom generall Councels do consist 645. Chap. 50. Of the President of generall Councels 649. Chap. 51. Of the assurance of finding out the truth which the Bishops assembled in generall Councels haue 660. Chap. 52. Of the calling of Councels and to whom that right pertaineth 667. Chap. 53. Of the power and authority exercised by the ancient Emperours in generall Councels and of the Supremacie of Christian Princes in causes and ouer persons Ecclesiasticall 677. Chap. 54. Of the calling of Ministers and the persons to whom it pertaineth to elect and ordaine them 686. Chap. 55. Of the Popes disordered intermedling with elections of Bishops and other Ministers of the Church their vsurpation intrusion and preiudicing the right and liberty of others 696. Chap. 56. Of the ordinations of Bishops and Ministers 702. Chap. 57. Of the things required in such as are to be ordained Ministers and of the lawfulnesse of their Marriage 704. Chap. 58. Of Digamie and what kind of it it is that debarreth men from entring into the Ministerie 727. Chap. 59. Of the maintenance of Ministers 733. What things are Occasionally handled in the Appendix to the fifth Booke THat Protestants admit triall by the Fathers 749. Of Purgatory and Prayer for the dead 750. 764. 776. 783. 787. 792. Whether generall Councels may erre 761. The opinion of the Greekes concerning Purgatory 764. Of Transubstantiation 770. The opinion of some of the Schoolemen thinking that finall Grace purgeth out all sinfulnesse out of the soule in the moment of dissolution 772. Of the heresie of Aerius 789. Nothing constantly resolued on concerning Purgatory in the Romane Church at Luthers appearing 790. Abuses in the Romane Church disliked by Gerson 795. Grosthead opposing the Pope 809. The agreement of diuers before Luther with that which Protestants now teach 813. Of the difference betweene the German Diuines and vs concerning the Vbiquitary presence and the Sacrament 819. The differences of former times amongst the Fathers and of the Papists at this day compared with the differences that are found amongst Protestants 823. Of the Rule whereby all controuersies are to be ended 827. That the Elect neuer fall totally from grace once receiued 833. What manner of faith is found in infants that are baptised 837. Of the saying of Augustine that hee would not beleeue the Gospell if the authority of the Church did not moue him 841. Of the last resolution of our faith 844. 856. Of the sufficiency of the Scripture 847. Of Traditions 849. 892. Of the merit of works
satisfied in any thing vnder God And so generally and absolutely denie that the Image of God can bee lost or blotted out These make a difference betweene the Image of God thus restrained to the largnesse and and admirable perfection of the naturall faculties of the soule and the similitude or likenesse of God which appeareth in the qualities and vertues of it making him that possesseth them partaker of the diuine nature which they confesse to be lost Now this similitude is all one with the Image of God in the second consideration set down by Aquinas and therefore in this matter Caluin erreth not but writeth that which is consonant vnto the truth Touching the second part of this imputation it is true that Origen erred thinking hell to be nothing else but horror of conscience But he that looketh in the place in Caluin cited by the Iesuite shall see that he saith no such thing but the cleane contrary So that the Reader shall finde Bellarnne to be constant and stil like himselfe adding one calumniation to another CHAP. 25. Of the heresie of the Peputians making women Priests THe fourth Heresie imputed vnto vs by our adversaries is that of the Peputians who gaue women authoritie to intermeddle with the sacred ministerie of the Church That we doe so likewise they indeavour to proue by misreporting the words of Luther There are two things therefore which Luther saith in the place alleadged by them First that in absolution and remission of sinnes in the supposed Sacrament of Penance a Bishop or ordinary Presbyter may doe as much as the Pope himselfe which Alphonsus à Castro writing against Heresies confesseth to bee true The second that when and where no Presbyter can be found to performe this office a Lay man yea or a woman in this case of necessitie may absolue which our adversaries neede not to thinke so strange seeing themselues giue power to women to baptise in case of necessitie which I thinke is as much a ministeriall acte as to absolue the penitent in such sort as absolution is giuen in the Church of Rome And yet they would thinke themselues wronged if from hence it should bee inferred that they make women Priests and Bishoppes But Bellarmine reporteth the wordes of Luther as if hee should say absolutely that a woman or childe hath as much power and authority from God in these things as any Presbyter or Bishop wherein hee is like himselfe Absolution in the Primitiue Church was the reconciling and restoring of penitents to the peace of the Church and to the Communion of the Sacraments from which during the time of their penitencie they were excluded This in reason none could doe but they to whom the dispensation of the Sacraments was committed and who had power to deny the Sacraments The Popish absolution is supposed to bee a Sacramentall acte Sacramentally taking away sinne and making the party absolued partaker of the remission of it This is a false and erronious conceite LVTHER thinketh it to bee a comfortable pronouncing and assuring of good to the humble penitent and sorrowfull sinner which though ordinarily and ex officio the Minister bee to doe yet may any man doe it with like effect when none of that ranke is or can be present Thus when the matter is well examined it is meerely nothing that Bellarmine can proue against Luther But that which hee addeth touching our late dread Soueraigne ELIZABETH of famous memorie that shee was reported and taken as chiefe Bishop within her dominions of England c. is more then a Cardinall lye and might beseeme the father of lyes better then any meaner professour of that facultie For the Kings and Queenes of England neither doe nor haue power to doe any ministeriall act or act of sacred order as to preach administer Sacraments and the like But that power and authority which we ascribe vnto them is that they may by their princely right take notice of matters of Religion and the exercise of it in their kingdomes That they may and in duty stand bound to see that the true Religion bee professed and God rightly worshipped That God hath giuen them the sword to punish all offenders against the first or second Table yea though they be Priests or Bishops That neither the persons nor the goods of Churchmen are exempted from their power That they holde their Crownes immediatly from God and not from the Romish Antichrist That it was the Lucifer-like pride of Antichrist which appeared in times past in the Popes wheē they shamed not to say that the Kings of England were their villanes vassalls and slaues Thus then the fourth supposed heresie we are charged with proueth to be nothing but a diuelish slander of this shamelesse Iesuite Wee say therefore to silence this slanderer that we all most constantly hold the contrary of that he imputeth vnto vs And that wee thinke there is no more daungerous or presumptuous wicked boldnesse then for any man not called set a part and sanctified therevnto to intermeddle with any part of the sacred ministerie of the Church CHAP 26. Of the supposed heresie of Proclus and the Messalians touching concupiscence in the regenerate THe fift heresie which hee endevoureth to fasten vpon vs is he saith the heresie of Proclus of whom Epiphanius maketh mention But what was the heresie of Proclus Let Bellarmine tell vs for our learning It was sayth he that sin doth alwayes continue and liue in the Regenerate for that concupiscence is truely and properly sin which is not taken away by Baptisme but only allaied stilled and brought as it were into a kind of rest and sleepe by force thereof and the working of faith In this Bellarmine sheweth his intolerable either ignorance or impudence or both For Epiphanius in the place cited by him refuteth the heresie of Origen who denied the resurrection of the bodies of men as thinking such bodily substances which we see are continually subject to alteration here in this world not capable of immortality And that God did put these bodies vpon Adam and Eue after their sin at that time when he is said to haue made them coates of skinnes This Epiphanius refuteth shewing that God who only hath immortality made man though out of the earth yet by the immediate touch of his owne hands that he breathed into him the breath of life for that he meant he should be immortall that man had flesh and blood and a true bodily substance before his fall as is prooued by that of Adam concerning Eue This is now flesh of my flesh and bone of my bone that there was no euill found in the World such as death is in the beginning that man voluntarily sinned against God and therevpon God brought in death that euen as the Schoolemaster vseth correction not for any delight he hath in it but for that thereby he intendeth to bring his Schollers to forsake their negligent and disordered courses and to
that vpon his bare word wee should beleeue so shamelesse a lye For Augustine which was before this Persian in his booke De moribus Ecclesiae libro primo capite tricesimo quarto hath the same heresie as it pleaseth these heretikes to call it Nolite inquit consectari turbas imperitorum qui in ipsà verâ religione superstitiosi sunt Novi multos esse sepulchrorum picturarum adoratores quos mores Ecclesia condemnat quotidiè corrigere studet And Gregory after the time of this supposed Persian doth condemne the adoration of Images And the Councell of Frankford likewise after his time as appeareth by Hincmarus and others Besides if Nicephorus follow the judgement of the Fathers of the second Nicene Councell hee meaneth nothing else by that adoration of Images which hee approoueth but the embracing kissing and reverent vsing of them like to the honour wee doe the Bookes of holy Scripture not that Religious worshippe which consisteth in spirit and trueth which the Papists yeelde to their Idoles And so there is as great difference of judgement betweene him and Bellarmine as betweene him and vs. That which Bellarmine addeth against Caluine and others touching the time that Images were first brought into the Church if this place did require the examination of it wee should finde him as notable a trifler therein as in all the rest CHAP. 37 Of the errour of the Lampetians touching vowes THe errour of the Lampetians was as Alphonsus à Castro supposeth that it is not lawfull for men to vowe and by vowing to lay a necessity vpon themselues of doing those things which freely and without any such tye might much better bee performed If they disliked simply all vowing wee doe not approue their opinion as may appeare by that which Kemnisius Zanchius and others haue written to this purpose and therefore wee are vniustly said to fauour their errour That which Bellarmine addeth for the strengthening of this his vniust imputation is a meere calumniation For Luther doth not say that a man should vow to do a thing as long as hee shall bee pleased and then to be free againe when hee shall dislike that which before hee resolued on but that all vowes should be made with limitation to bee so farre performed as humane frailty will permitte that it is better after a vow made to breake it to discend to the doing of that which is lawfull good though not carrying so great show of perfection as that which by vowe was promised than under the pretence of keeping it to liue in all dissolute wickednesse as the manner of the Popish votaries is whereupon the Fathers are cleare that marriage after a vow made of single life is lawfull and that it is better to marry than continuing single to liue lewdly and wantonly CHAP. 38. Of the heresie of certaine touching the verity of the body and blood of Christ communicated to vs in the Sacrament THe last heresie might well haue beene omitted For those heretikes condemned by Theodoret Ignatius and others denied the verity of Christs humane nature and thereupon condemned the Sacrament of his body and blood So that it was not the impugning of Popish Transubstantiation as Bellarmine idlely fancieth that was reprooued in them but the denying of the trueth of that body and blood which all true Christians doe know to bee mystically communicated to them in the Sacrament to their vnspeakeable comfort How then can we be charged with the heresie of these men seeing wee neither deny the verity of Christs humane nature nor make the Sacrament to be a naked figure or similitude only but acknowledge that it consisteth of two things the one earthly and the other heauenly and that the body of Christ is truely present in the Sacrament and communicated to vs though neither Capernaitically to be torne with the teeth nor popishly to bee swallowed and carried downe into the stomacke and belly Thus then wee see how fondly this Cardinall heretike hath indeuoured to prooue vs heretikes and to hold the old condemned heresies of those cursed Arch-heretikes whose frensies wee condemne much more than he and his fellowes doe So that he is so farre from demonstrating either our consent with condemned heretikes that were of old or their consent with the auncient Fathers and consequently the antiquity of their profession that contrarily all that are not blinded with partiality may easily see that the whole course of Popish doctrine is nothing but a confused mixture of errours and all that they write against vs nothing but meere calumniation slander CHAP. 39. Of Succession and the exceptions of the aduersaries against vs in respect of the supposed want of it THus then hauing taken a view of whatsoeuer they can or do alleage for proofe of the antiquity of their doctrine which is the first note of the Church assigned by them let vs come vnto the second which is Succession and see if they haue any better successe in it than in the former In what sense Succession may bee granted to bee a note of the true Church I haue shewed already let vs therefore see how and what our aduersaries conclude from thence against vs or for themselues By this note say they it is easie to prooue that the reformed Churches are not the true Churches of God Ecclesia non est quae non habet sacerdotem saith Hierome against the Luciferians It can be no Church that hath no Ministery And Cyprian to the same purpose pronounceth that the Church is nothing els but Plebs episcopo adunata Thus therefore from these authorities they reason Where there is no ministery there is no Church But amongst the Protestants there is no Ministerie therefore no Church The Minor proposition or assumption of this argument wee deny which they endeuour to prooue in this sorte There is no lawfull calling to the worke of the Ministery amongst the Protestants therefore no Ministery The defects they suppose to bee in the calling of our Bishops and Ministers are two fold first for that they that ordained them in the beginning of this alteration of things in the state of the Church had no power so to doe Secondly for that no man may be ordained but into a voide place either wherein there neuer was any Pastour or Bishop before as in Churches in their first foundation or wherein there hauing beene their place is now voide by the death depriuation or voluntary relinquishment of them that possest it before that so they who are newly elected and ordained may succeede into the void roomes of such as went before them and not intrude vpon their charge wherevnto they are still iustly intituled Our Bishops and Pastours were ordayned and placed in the beginning of the reformation of religion where there were Bishops already in actuall possession These being the defects which they suppose to be in the calling of our Bishops Ministers let
that if the Apostles were equall in the respect they had to the people as gouernours of the same they were so far forth in that respect equall amongst thēselues But they will say perhaps that the Apostles were indeed equall amongst themselues in the power office of teaching directing guiding gouerning the Christian World but that yet amongst themselues there was an inequality one was superior had power ouer the rest not in respect of the acts of their office of teaching gouerning the world but in respect of their personall actions This surely is one of the strangest paradoxes that euer was heard of For who can imagine that God would trust the Apostles with the managing of the weightiest affaires of his Church the gouernment of the whole world without being any way accountant in respect thereof vnto any one amongst thē as superiour that he would appoint an head chief subject them to his censure in their personall actions Nay this is impossible cannot be For if in their office of teaching gouerning the rest of the Church they were equall could not therein be limited or restrained one by another then was there none amongst them that could put any of the rest from his office dignity and imployment Now it is most cleare and certaine that he who hath not power to suspend another from the execution of his office in the Church hath no power to suspend him frō the Sacraments or to excōmunicate him whatsoeuer his personall misdemeanours be For as to be a Minister of the Church presupposeth to bee a member of it soe to be put from being a member of the Church implyeth and presupposeth a putting from all office and dignity in the Church soe that there neither was nor could bee any amongst the Apostles that had power to put any of the rest out of the Church or to suspend them from the vse of the Sacraments seeing there was none found amongst them that had authority to limit restraine or debarre any of the rest from the execution of his office and therefore all that any one of them could do in respect of another was but to admonish him vpon his rejecting of such admonitions to refuse to communicate with him which thing any one may doe in an absolute equality as well as when one is superiour to another as we see by the example of Paul reprouing Peter and resisting him to his face and likewise by that of Paul and Barnabas parting the one from the other vpon such dislikes and differences as grew betweene them Wherefore I suppose our Aduersaries will not much insist vpon this their first shift and evasion Let vs see therefore if their second be any better It is true say they that all power Ecclesiasticall and all degrees of the same are included and implyed in the Apostolique office and dignity that the Apostles as Apostles were all equall and consequently that there was no one amongst the Apostles but in his time had as much to doe in gouerning of the Church as Peter without receiuing any thing from him or being any way subiect to his controule and to be restrained limited or directed by him But this amplitude of power whicch all the Apostles had in common the rest had onely for themselues and as a personall priuiledge that was to end with them but Peter had the same in such sort that he might leaue it to to his Successours Soe that that power which in the rest was Apostolique and temporary and to end with them was ordinary Pastorall and perpetuall in Peter and to be deriued from him to his Successours and after-commers Surely this second evasion will be found much worse then the first for it is absurd to say that Peter left all the dignity and Ecclesiasticall power he had in common with the rest of the Apostles to his successours for then all Popes should be immediately chosen by God not by the Cardinals then should they all be consecrated and ordained immediately by Christ not by Bishops then should they all see Christ in the flesh then should they all haue power to write bookes of Canonicall Scripture and be free from danger of erring whensoeuer they either preach or write for so the Apostles were yea then should they confirme their doctrine by miracles and giue the Holy Ghost by imposition of their Hands Whereas yet noe Pope dareth challenge any one of these preeminences If they say that all the dignity and power that was in the Apostles vvas not ordinary Pastorall and perpetuall in Peter and soe to be passed ouer to his Successours but some part of it onely it is just nothing they say For then this is all that they affirme that some part of that dignity and power that was in Peter is in Peters Successours and so there is in the silliest Priest in the world But they will say immediate vocation the seeing of Christ in the flesh infallibility of judgment power to write Canonicall bookes of Scripture and the confirmation of doctrine by miracles together with the giuing of the holy Ghost by imposition of hands were fitting to the first beginnings of Christianity and not of perpetuall necessity and vse and therefore to cease after things were established but that vniversality of jurisdiction and a kind of infallibility of judgment are perpetually necessarie and therefore these were to passe from Peter to others though the rest of the Apostolique preeminences were not Thus then first they amplifie the excellent dignities of Peter as if the rest had not had the like but being conuinced that hee had nothing the rest had not they make shew as if they would proue that the Apostle S. Peter had all those things in such sort that hee might leaue them to his Successours which the rest had as personall priuilidges onely because hee is described to be a Pastour of the Church in that CHRIST sayth vnto him Feed my sheepe and the office of a Pastour is of perpetuall necessity But being vrged that there are many excellent dignities found in Peter and the rest that are not communicable to any other as immediate vocation seeing of CHRIST in the flesh absolute infallibilitie in word and writing speaking in diuerse tongues power to doe miracles and power to giue the visible giftes of the holy Ghost by the imposition of hands they confesse that precisely Peters being a Pastour of the Christian Church will not proue that anie dignitie of his mentioned in the Scripture is perpetuall pastorall and to continue for euer vnlesse the necessity of the perpetuity of it bee made to appeare otherwise Whence it will follow that they cannot proue that any speciall preeminences in Peter which hee had in common with the rest as namely infallibility of judgment and vniuersality of Iurisdiction were Pastorall and perpetuall in him and to bee passed from him to his after-commers and thereby entitle the Pope vnto them For
leaue to whom they pleased That the other Apostles were Pastours first the Hymne of the Church wherein they are expressely saide to haue bin constituted Pastours by Christ proueth Secondly the confession of Bellarmine acknowledging that what was giuen to Peter by those wordes Feede my sheepe was giuen vnto all by those other wordes As my Father sent me so send I you confirmeth the same And thirdly the enumeration of the seuerall kindes of feeding euery of which the Diuines doe shew to agree to the rest as well as to Peter demonstrateth that they were all Pastours Secondly whereas they say that the office of a Pastour is a thing of perpetuall vse and necessitie and consequently perpetuall and that the amplitude of power which was in Peter agreed vnto him in that hee was a Pastor and as a Pastor they bewray notable ignorance and folly For it is true indeed that the office of a Pastor is of perpetuall vse and necessity and soe to continue for euer but the amplitude of power and jurisdiction and the great preëminences that were in Peter did not agree vnto him as to a Pastour or in that hee was a Pastor For if they had then must they agree to euery Pastor so euery Bishop must haue the same not the Pope only For as whatsoever agreeth to a man in that he is a man agreeth to every man so whatsoeuer agreeth to a Pastor in that he is a Pastor agreeth to euery one that is a Pastor If they shall say that the great and ample preëminences that were in Peter did not agree vnto him as a Pastor but in some other respect then his beeing a Pastor which is an office of perpetuall necessity vse and continuance will not proue the same perpetuall no more then other things which this Pastour had in that he was an Apostle If they shall say these things agreed vnto him not in that he was a Pastor but in that he was such a Pastor as was to feed the flocke of Christ and people of God by deliuering vnto them the doctrine of truth without all mixture of any the least errour to confirme the same by miracles following to giue the visible gifts of the holy Spirit by the only imposition of his hands it is true that they say but such a Pastour they confesse is necessary onely in the beginnings of the Christian Church and not afterwards and therefore from hence it cannot be concluded that the ample preëminences that were in Peter as his infallibility of judgement and illimited Commission were to be passed ouer from him to his Successors and after-commers Their second conceipt is more fond then the first For if Peter were by Christ constituted sole supreme Pastour and Bishoppe of the whole vniuersall world and yet his meaning was that others should likewise receiue immediatly from himselfe power to doe as much in the governing of the Church as Peter he meant to giue him something and presently to take it from him againe For as if the Pope shall make a man Bishop of such a cittie or countrey and thereby giue vnto him that supreme direction that nothing shall be done within that compasse without his authoritie and consent and shall presently send another with full authority to doe any thing that the former may do and no way to bee subiect to his controule or restraint in the performance thereof or accomptant for it hee reuoketh and maketh voyde his first graunt so here if Christ make Peter supreme Bishoppe and Pastour of the whole Christian world and presently constitute eleuen other Apostles with power and commission to doe any thing that Peter may doe in all parts of the world and towards all persons which as they haue not from him so he cannot take it from them or limit them in the vse of it hee absolutely voideth his first graunt made to Peter But they will say perhaps that Christ meant little fauour to Peter more then to one of the rest of the Apostles but that all his care was for the good of the Pope whom hee meant to make a great man in the world and that therefore he constituted the other Apostles immediatly as well as Peter put them into equall commission with him and would not haue them beholding to him for any honour or power they had but appointed that all other Bishops should receiue their mission calling commission and authority from Peter during the short time of his life and after his departure in all succeeding ages to the end of the world from his Successours the Bishoppes of Rome This truly is well said in fauour of the Pope if it were as truly said as it is kindly meant but we shall find that there is no truth in that they say For it is cleare and evident that each Apostle by his commission hee had from Christ without being any way beholding to Peter for it had authority to preach the Gospell to such as neuer heard of it before to plant Churches and ordaine constitute in them Pastours and Bishops and out of his more large and ample commission to make other though somewhat more restrained and limited whence it will follow that they whom any of the other Apostles ordained and constituted Pastours and Bishoppes which were innumerable in all parts of the world receiued nothing from Peter nor his pretended Successour Now they whom the Apostles thus constituted and ordained might constitute and ordaine other by vertue of their office and calling they had from the Apostles and those other other againe to succeede them so that none of these to the end of the world one succeeding another should euer receiue any thing frō Peter or his pretended Successor And therefore it is absurd that Bellarmine saith that the Apostles receiued all their jurisdiction immediately from Christ that yet notwithstanding all Bishops receiue the same frō the Pope And those Papists are better aduised that say that the Bishops of other Churches receiue not their jurisdiction from the Pope but from Christ by those Apostles that constituted their Churches and planted their predecessours in the same setting them the bounds of their Bishop-like charge whence it will follow as Bellarmine wisely foresaw and therefore declined this opinion that the Pope cannot either take away or diminish their authority vnlesse any man can shew where Christ gaue him power to limite restraine or take away that power from men which they haue from himselfe by the hands of the other Apostles and their after-commers without being any way beholding to Peter for the same Wherefore they haue yet one more strange conceipt behind to helpe the matter then any of those we haue hitherto heard which is that Peter being not onely an Apostle but supreme Pastour and Bishop of the whole world constituted by Christ made the other Apostles Bishops and Pastours and that they ordained Bishops not by vertue of their Apostolique power which they receiued immediately from
and when Paul and Barnabas were companions and their trauels were equall yet Paul is noted to haue beene the chiefe speaker so that though both were worthy of double honour yet Paul especially Some interprete the words in this sort There were some that remained in some certaine places for the guiding and gouerning of such as were already wonne by the preaching of the Gospell other that travayled with great labour and paines from place to place to spread the knowledge of God into all parts and to preach Christ crucified to such as had neuer heard of him before Both these were worthy of double honour but the later that builded not vpon another mans foundation more especially then the former that did but keepe that which others had gotten and governe those that others had gained Thus wee see that these words may haue a very good and true sense without pressing of them to confirme the late conceipt of some few men touching Lay-elders Which construction wee haue no reason to admitte seeing the circumstances of the place doe not enforce it nor no Ecclesiasticall writer did euer so interprete the words before our age So that to conclude this point the name of Presbyter one place onely in the first of Timothy and the fifth excepted where it is a name of age and not of office in the writings of the Apostles doth euer note out vnto vs a Minister of the Word and Sacraments The reason why the Apostles chose this word rather then the name of Sacerdos which wee commonly translate Priest though the English word Priest come of Presbyter was lest there should be a confusion of the Ministers of the old Testament who were to offer sacrifices vnto God figuring the comming of Christ with those of the new and to shew that none should be appointed Ministers but men of ripe age and confirmed judgment But some man will say the auncient Writers mention Seniours without whose advice nothing was done an Ecclesiasticall Senate and a Presbytery or company of Presbyters which gouerned the Church together with the Bishop therefore the matter is not so cleare against Lay-elders as some would make it Wee deny not but that there were Presbyters in the primitiue Church constituted and ordained by the Apostles and their Successours not onely to preach and minister Sacraments but to gouerne direct and guide the people of God also but that they were Lay-men it cannot bee proued The Bishops in the greater Churches and in the Citties had a great number of Clergy-men seruing in diuers sorts as it appeareth by Cyprian and the whole Ecclesiasticall history but out of the whole Clergie at large the Presbytery or company of Presbyters was called forth to the weightiest deliberations and to assist the Bishop for the preseruation of discipline Admonitos nos instructos sciatis dignatione diuinâ sayth Cyprian vt Numidicus Presbyter ascribatur Presbyterorum Carthaginensium numero nobiscum sedeat in Clero that is Know yee that we haue beene admonished and directed by God himselfe to choose Numidicus and to make him one of the company of the Presbyters of Carthage that he may sit together with vs as a Clergy-man by which words it appeareth that there was in Cyprians time a Colledge of Presbyters or Elders in the Church of Carthage which sate together with the Bishop for the hearing and determining of the causes of the Church but that these Elders were Clergie-men and not such Lay-seniours as some would haue Cornelius Bishop of Rome writing to Cyprian se totum Presbyterium contraxisse that is that hee drew together the whole Presbytery or companie of Presbyters for the reconciling of certaine Schismatiques to the Church and that hee called together fiue Bishops also and by common consent ended the whole matter Of this Senate and company of Presbyters Tertullian speaketh in his Apologie when he sayth with vs the most approued Seniours do sit as praesidents to censure offendours and to exercise discipline And of these likewise is it that Hierome sayth writing vpon Esay We also in the Church haue our Senate the company of Presbyters And vpon Titus The Churches were gouerned by the common aduice and councell of the Presbyters For to put it out of doubt that he meaneth not Lay-elders hee sayth in the same place Idem est ergo Presbyter qui Episcopus that is Therefore a Presbyter and Bishop are all one There is onely one place in Ambrose that hath some shew of proofe for Lay-elders His words are The Iewish Synogogue and after the Church had Seniours or Elders without whose councell nothing was done in the Church which by what negligence it grew out I know not vnlesse it were by the sloth or pride of the Teachers whilest they alone would seeme to be something Here is mention of Elders without whose aduice nothing was done but it is not sayd they were Lay-men But some man perhaps will reply that the Elders which Ambrose speaketh of ceased before his time which cannot be vnderstood of Clergie-men therefore they were Lay-men To this we say that Ambrose doth not say the elders without whose councell nothing was to be done ceased before his time and were no more but that the aduising and consulting with them ceased whilest some would doe all themselues If it be sayd that they who thus assumed more then was fitte and excluded those Seniours without whose councell anciently nothing was done are not said to haue bin Bishops but Doctours and that therefore Ambrose speaketh not of Bishops excluding other Ministers of the Word and Sacraments from their consultations but of Clergie-men refusing the aduice of Lay Seniours we answere that Ambrose by the name of Teachers whose sloath or pride hee condemneth in this place might fitly vnderstand the Bishops seeing none but bishops haue power to preach in their owne right and other but only by permission from them Hereupon it is that Possidonius in the life of Augustine saith that Valerius Bishop of Hippo gaue S. Augustine his Presbyter leaue to preach because being a Grecian hee could not very well expresse himselfe in Latine In the Councell of Vase leaue is giuen by the Councell of Bishops to Presbyters for to preach But because this question touching Lay-elders is excellently handled by sundry of our Diuines I will not trouble the Reader with any farther discourse of this matter CHAP. 27. Of the distinction of the Power of Order and Iurisdiction and the preheminence of one amongst the Presbyters of each Church who is named a Bishop CEasing to speake of supposed Lay-elders which the Church of God knoweth not let vs come to the other that were appointed to teach and gouerne the people of GOD. Where first wee are to speake of the diuerse degrees of honour and preheminence found amongst them Secondly of their calling and appointing to the same And thirdly of their maintenance For the clearing of the former of these three
things the Schoole-men note that there is a two-folde power found in the Ministers of the Church of GOD the one of Order the other of Iurisdiction The power of Order is that whereby they are sanctified and enabled to the performance of such sacred acts as other men neither may nor can doe as is the preaching of the Word and ministration of the holy Sacraments This power is to bee exercised orderly and the acts of it to bee performed in such sort that one disturbe not another Whereupon the Apostles the first Ministers of CHRIST IESVS though equall in the power of Order and Iurisdiction yet for the better and more orderly dispatch of the great worke of converting the world which they had in hand and that they might not hinder one another divided amongst themselues the parts and Provinces of the World but when for the assisting of them while they liued and succeeding them dying they were to passe ouer part of their power to other they so gaue authoritie to such as they made choyce of for this worke to preach baptize and doe other acts of sacred Ministery which are to bee performed by vertue of the power of order that before they invested them with this power they divided the parts of the world converted to Christianity into seuerall Churches and when they ordained them assigned each of them to that particular Church wherein he should preach and minister Sacraments So that these successours of the Apostles had not an illimited commission but were confined within certaine bounds that they were not to preach nor minister Sacraments but onely within the limits and compasse of those places which were assigned vnto them vnlesse it were with the consent desire and liking of other willing to draw them at sometimes for speciall causes to performe such sacred acts within the limites and bounds of their charge This assigning of men hauing the power of order the persons to whom they were to minister holy things and of whom they were to take the care and the subjecting of such persons vnto thē gaue them the power of jurisdiction which they had not before And thus was the vse of the power of order which is not included within any certain boūds limited in those the Apostles ordained their power of Iurisdictiō included within certain bounds so that the one of these kinds of power they haue not at all without the extēt of their own limits nor the lawful vse of the other Hence is that resolutiō of the Diuines that if a Bishop adventure to do any act of Iurisdictiō out of his own Diocese as to excōmunicate absolue or the like all such acts are vtterly voide of no force but if hee shall doe any act of the power of order in another mans charge as preach or minister Sacraments though he cannot be excused as not offending if he doe these things without his consent yet are the Sacraments thus ministred truly Sacraments and of force When the Apostles first founded Churches and assigned to such as they ordained to the worke of the ministery the seuerall parts of the flocke of Christ and people of GOD of which they appointed them to take care and charge they so sorted divided out particular Churches that a Cittie and the places neere adioyning made but one Church Wherevpon wee shall finde in the holy Scriptures that to ordaine Presbyters 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is in euery Church and in euery Citty are all one Now because Churches of so large extent required many Ministers of the Word and Sacraments and yet of one Church there must be but one Pastour the Apostles in setling the state of these Churches did so constitute in them many Presbyters with power to teach instruct and direct the people of God that yet they appointed one onely to be chiefe Pastour of the place ordaining that the rest should be but his assistants not presuming to doe any thing without him so that though they were all equall in the power of order yet were the rest inferior vnto him in the government of that Church whereof hee was Pastour and they but his assistants onely As another of my ranke cannot haue that Iurisdiction within my Church as I haue but if hee will haue any thing to doe there he must be inferiour in degree vnto me So wee reade in the Reuelation of Saint Iohn of the Angell of the Church of Ephesus to whom the Spirit of God directeth letters from heauen as to the Pastour of that Church It is not to be doubted but that there were many Presbyters that is Ministers of the Word and Sacraments in so large a Church as that of Ephesus was nay wee reade expressely in the Acts that there were many in that Church that fed the flocke of Christ and consequently were admitted into some part of pastorall office employment yet was there one amongst the rest to whom onely the Lord did write from heauen to whom an eminent power was giuen who was trusted with the government of that Church and people in more speciall sort then any of the rest and therefore challenged by name by Almighty God for the thinges there found to bee amisse the rest being passed ouer in silence The like wee reade of the rest of the seven Churches of Asia compared to seuen golden candlestickes in the midst whereof the Sonne of God did walke hauing in his hand seuen starres interpreted to haue beene the seuen Angels of those seuen Churches Neither was this orderly superiority of one amongst the Presbyters of the Church found onely in the seuen Churches of Asia but in other Churches also For Saint Hierome testifieth that in the Church of Alexandria from the time of Marke the Evangelist there was euer one whom the Presbyters of that Church chose out of themselues to be ouer the rest Neither was this proper to the Church of Alexandria but wee can shew the successions of Bishops in all the famous Churches of the world euen from the Apostles times and therefore all admitte and allow a kinde of preëminence of one aboue the rest in each Church Heresies haue sprung saith Cyprian and schismes risen from no other fountaine then this that Gods Priest is not obeyed nor one Priest in the Church acknowledged for the time to bee Iudge in Christs steed If one saith Hierome in each Church be not aboue and before the rest of the Presbyters there will be as many Schismes as Priests and the best learned in our age that affect presbyteriall government ingenuously confesse it to be an essentiall perpetuall part of Gods ordinance for each presbytery to haue a chiefe amongst them the necessity whereof wee may learne from all Societies both of men indued with reason and of other thinges also to which God hath denied the light of vnderstanding The dumbe beasts saith Hierome and wilde Heards haue their
either of them The gouernment of a prouince is principally Aristocraticall resting in the Bishops of the prouince their assistants but it hath a kinde of chiefty of one hauing a primacie of order and honour amongst the rest who being placed in the Metropolis or Mother cittie is named a Metropolitane This gouernment is so mixed that the Bishops may doe nothing concerning the state of the whole Prouince or out of the limits of their owne Churches without consulting the Bishop of the mother citty nor he without them and if they differ in judgement and opinion he is bound to follow the maior part of voices for the ending and determining of all controuersies that may or doe arise concerning matters of faith or of fact Neither is this the forme of gouernment of one prouince only but the gouernment of larger circuits is altogether like vnto it and in proportion the same For looke what the Metropolitane is in respect of the Bishops of the prouince that and no more is the primate or Patriarch in respect of the Metropolitans Bishops of diuerse prouinces so that as the Metropolitan canne doe nothing out of his owne Diocese without the concurrence of the maior part of the Bishops of the province though he be in order and honour the first and greatest amongst them who must bee consulted before they canne doe any thing so in like sort the Primate or Patriarch may doe nothing without the aduice and consent of the Metropolitanes Bishops subiect vnto him So that wee see the forme of Church gouernment is mixt in such sort that in respect of a Diocese or particular Church there is a speciall authority resting in one though not excluding nor neglecting the assistance and concurrence of more but the gouernment of many particular Churches and prouinces is principally Aristocraticall all thinges being swayed by the maior part of the voyces of the Bishops and Metropolitanes yet admitting a primacie of order and honour of one amongst the rest who must be first consulted from whom all deliberations must take beginning and who sitteth in all their meetings as a president and moderatour This Bellarmine endeavoureth to improue and therefore laboureth to shew that the supreme power of the Church is not in the company of Bishops His first reason is because Christ as he supposeth gaue no authority to his Apostles and Disciples but that which he gaue to euery one of them apart as to preach baptize binde and loose remitte and retaine sinne But this silly argument is easily answered and the absurditie of Bellarmines confident affirmation is too too apparant For to ordaine Bishops to depose Bishops or Presbyters and to determine the differences and controversies that arise amongst them is as I thinke a great part of Ecclesiasticall power and jurisdiction yet may no one Bishop doe any of these things but the company of Bishops onely To the ordination of a Bishop the presence of the Metropolitane and of three other Bishoppes at the least with the consent of the rest that are absent signified in writing is by the olde Canons required neither did the Church euer admit lesse then three Bishops to ordaine vnlesse in certaine cases of necessitie And touching the depriuing or degrading of Bishoppes Presbyters and Deacons the auncient Canon requireth the concurrence and consent of three Bishoppes for the censuring and depriuing of a Deacon of sixe for the depriuing of a Presbyter of twelue for the censuring judging and deposing of a Bishop Wherefore let vs see if the Cardinall haue any better reason behinde His second reason is that it cannot bee imagined that CHRIST committed the gouernement of the Church to the company of Bishoppes for that then the Church should oftentimes lacke Gouernours for that the Bishoppes are seldome assembled by joint consent to decree and determine things Surely this reason hath farre lesse strength then the former for in the beginning all the Bishoppes of each Province met to the ordination of euery Bishoppe newly elected and twice in the yeare besides there was a Synode holden consisting of all the Bishoppes of the Province the Metropolitane not onely hauing power but also being straightly bound to convocate his brethren and they as surely tyed and obliged to come when he called them His third reason which he bringeth to proue that the gouernement of the church was not by Christ committed to the company of Bishoppes but to some one chiefe and supreme amongst them is for that the whole multitude of right beleeuing Christians is one church and therefore must haue one chiefe Ruler For answere hereunto wee say that a church may bee named one either in respect of the same faith hope profession meanes of saluation and communion or fellowship of Saints and so the whole multitude of right beleeuers throughout the world is but one church or in respect of the same immediate communicating together in Sacraments and in the actions and exercises of Gods worship and seruice The vnitie of the church of God in this later sort implyeth and requireth a necessitie of the vnity of one chief Pastour but the vnity of the church in the former sort may stand without the vnity of one Pastour Christian men saith Ockam in Scripture are compared to sheepe and the church of God to a fold Now though it bee expedient that these sheepe so many as belong to the same particular fold that goe out to the same pastures to feed to the same riuers of water to drinke and doe remaine and abide together should be fed directed and guided by the same Pastour yet the sheepe of diuerse folds led out to diverse pastures to feede in and riuers of water to drinke may haue their diuersitie of Pastours vnder the same chiefe Sheepheard Christ Iesus neither is there any vnitie implyed in the whole Church or in the Churches of diuerse Provinces which may not be preserued as well by the multitude and diversitie of Pastours bound knit together in the bond of conspiring consent and agreement as by the vnitie of one chiefe Pastour And in this sort wee shall finde the Church of God to haue stood in perfect vnitie in the first and best ages thereof without finding any want of the helpe of one chiefe Pastour For how could there bee a more perfect vnitie in the whole Church then when the Pastour of each particular Church chosen by the Cleargie and people of the same was appointed by the Metropolitane and all the rest of the Bishops of the province for his sincerity in profession and godlinesse of conversation and ordained to the worke of the Ministery by the joint imposition of all their hands when the Metropolitanes of seuerall provinces were confirmed by the Primate or Patriarch but ordained by the Bishops of their provinces when the Patriarches elected by the Cleargie and people and ordained by their Metropolitanes sent their Synodall letters one to another testifying and expressing
their faith and profession before they were receiued and allowed one of another and before tehy were accounted and reputed for lawfull Patriarches Wherefore presupposing that the gouernment of the Church is not Monarchicall in respect of any one supreame Pastour on earth but mixt and hauing seene how notwithstanding the diuersitie of many Pastours the Church may be preserued in peace and vnity let vs more exactly and distinctly consider what the auncient forme of Church policie and gouernment was If we looke into the monuments of Antiquity wee shall finde that there were aunciently three Subordinations in the Church For the actions of the Bishoppe of each particular Church of a citty and places adjoyning were subject to the censure and judgment of the rest of the Bishops of the same prouince amongst whom for order sake there was one chiefe to whom it pertained to call them together to sit as moderator in the midst of them being assembled and to execute what by joynt consent they resolued on The actions of the Bishoppes of a prouince and a prouinciall Synode consisting of those Bishoppes were subject to a Synode consisting of the Metropolitanes and other Bishoppes of diuerse prouinces This Synode was of two sorts For either it consisted of the Metropolitanes and Bishoppes of one kingdome and nation onely as did the Councels of Africa or of the Metropolitans and Bishoppes of many kingdomes If of the Metropolitanes and Bishoppes of one kingdome and state onely the chiefe Primate was mederator If of many one of the Patriarches and chiefe Bishops of the whole world euery Church being subordinate to some one of the Patriarchicall Churches and incorporate into the vnity of it Thirdly the actions of the Bishops of a whole kingdome and Patriarchship were subject to an Oecumenicall Synode consisting of all the Patriarches and the Metropolitanes and Bishops subject to them Touching prouinciall Councells to the censures whereof the actions of particular Churches are subject they were by the auncient Canons of the Church to be holden in euery prouince twice euery yeare It is very necessary say the Fathers of the Councell of Nice that there should be a Synode twice euery yeare in euery prouince that all the Bishops of the prouince meeting together may in common thinke vpon those thinges that are doubtfull and questionable For the dispatch of Ecclesiasticall businesses and the determining of matters in controuersie Wee thinke it were fit say the Fathers in the Councell of Antioche that in euery prouince Synodes of Bishops should be assembled twice euery yeare The first councell of Constantinople decreeth the same and the Fathers assembled in the Councell of Chalcedon complaine that in some prouinces the Synodes of Bishops are not holden and that thereby many Ecclesiasticall matters needing reformation are neglected and therefore they appoint that the Bishops of euery prouince shall assemble euery yeare twice at that place which the Bishoppe of the mother Citty shall thinke fit to amend all thinges that shall be found to bee amisse in the prouince Here we see the necessity of holding these Synodes and by whom they were to bee called and moderated Wherefore let vs now proceede to see of whom they consisted what causes they examined and determined what the power of the Metropolitane originally was and what in processe of time by positiue constitution vpon due and just considerations it grew to be Touching the persons that prouinciall Synodes consisted of it is cleare and euident that not onely Bishops but Presbyters also were present in these Assemblies and had decisiue voyces whereupon the Councell of Antisiodorum sayth Let all the Presbyters being called come to the Synode in the Citty The Councell of Tarracon Let letters bee sent by the Metropolitane to his brethren that they bring with them to the Synode not onely some of the Presbyters of the Cathedrall Church but also of each Diocese And the fourth Councell of Toledo describing the forme of celebrating prouinciall Synodes hath these words Let the Bishops assembled goe to the Church and sit according to the time of their ordination and after all the Bishops are entred and set let the Presbyters be called and the Bishops sitting in compasse let Presbyters sit behind them and the Deacons stand before them In the first Councell of Toledo we find these words Considentibus Presbyteris astantibus Diaconis caeteris qui intererant Concilio congregato Patronus Episcopus dixit c. that is The Presbyters sitting together with the Bishops the Deacons standing before them and the rest which were present in the Councell assembled Patronus the Bishop said c. The like we reade of a Synode holden by Gregory the Pope The words are these Gregorius Papa coram sacratissimo corpore Beati Petri Apostoli cum Episcopis omnibus Romanae Ecclesiae Presbyteris residens assistentibus Diaconis cuncto Clero dixit c. that is Gregory the Pope sitting before the most sacred body of blessed Peter with all the Bishops of the Romane Church and the Presbyters also the Deacons standing before them and all the Clergie said c. And that Presbyters were not only present in Provinciall Synodes but had decisiue voyces as well as Bishops it appeareth by their subscribing to the Decrees of such Synodes in the very same forme and manner that Bishops did So that it will be found most false and vntrue that Bellarmine hath that Presbyters haue no voyces in Synodes and the auncient forme of our Convocation here in England wherein not onely the Arch-bishops and Bishops but sundry Presbyters also as well out of Cathedrall Churches as Dioceses at large are present and haue decisiue voices will clearely refute the same The causes that were wont to be examined and determined in the meeting of the Bishops of the prouince were the ordinations of Bishops when any Churches were voyd and the depriving and reiecting of all such as were found vnworthy of their honour and place and in a word any complaint of wrong done in any Church was there to be heard Let the prouinciall Synodes be holden twice euery yeare saith the Councell of Antioch and let the Presbyters and Deacons bee present and as many as thinke they haue beene any way hurt or wronged there expect the determination of the Synode The power of the Metropolitane was in calling the rest of the Bishops to the Synode in appointing the place of their meeting and in sitting as President in the midst of them and so were things moderated that neither the rest might proceede to doe any thing without consulting him nor hee to doe any thing without them but was tyed in all matters of difference to follow the maior part and if hee neglected his dutie in convocating his brethren that so things might bee determined by common consent hee was by the Canons subiect to censure and punishment Thus at first all matters were to be heard determined and
quicquid ego de vobis boni audio mihi imputo that is Whereas there were many Apostles yet in respect of the chiefty that Peter had as being Prince of the Apostles his Sea only grew to be in chiefe authority which in three places is yet the See but of one and the same Apostle For he exalted that Sea in which he pleased to rest and end this present life Hee beautified that Sea in which he placed Marke his Scholer and he firmly and strongly setled that Sea in which hee sate seauen yeares though with purpose in the end to leaue it When as therefore there is one See of one Apostle in which by diuine authority three sit as presidents whatsoeuer good I heare of you I impute it to my selfe And againe in the same place to Eulogius hauing spoken to him of the dignitie of Peters chaire in which he sate he saith He hath spoken to me of Peters chaire who himselfe sitteth on Peters chaire This is the opinion of these Romane Bishops touching the reason of the exaltation of the Seas of Rome Alexandria and Antioche aboue other Episcopall Seas who how partially soeuer they may be thought to be affected to the chaire of Peter yet herein do they mainly crosse the conceipt of the Romanists at this day in that they teach that other Bishops succeede Peter in the chaire and that chiefty and primacy he had as well as the Bishop of Rome The dignity of these 3 Apostolicall Churches was cōfirmed in the Nicene Councell and each of them confined within the ancient bounds and limits thereof Let the ancient custome say the Nicene Fathers continue in Aegypt Lybia and Pentapolis that the Bishop of Alexandria may haue power ouer all these seeing the Bishop of Rome hath the like custome In like sort in Antioche and other prouinces let euery Church retaine and keepe her owne degree and honour Bellarmine much troubleth himselfe about this limitation and bounding of these Patriarches as preiudiciall to the illimited iurisdiction of the Romane Bishop and therefore though it be most cleare that there was a particular assignation of Churches to euery of these Patriarches yet hee seeketh to auoyd the euidence of these words For whereas Ruffinus sayth it was decreede by the Councell of Nice that the Bishop of Alexandria should haue care and charge ouer Aegypt as the Bishop of Rome hath of the Churches neere that city and Theodorus Balsamon in the explication of the Nicene canons with Nilus in his booke against the primacie interpreteth the words of the Nicene decree in this sense that the Bishoppe of Alexandria should haue the charge of Aegypt Lybia and Pentapolis and the confirming of the Metropolitanes in those parts because the Bishop of Rome who hath a care of the West confirmeth the Metropolitanes of the West hee maketh this construction of the words of the councell Let the Bishop of Alexandria haue the charge of Aegypt seeing the Bishoppe of Rome was wont to permitte him soe to haue before any Councell had decreed it And soe hee sayth Nicolas the Pope in his Epistle to Michael the Emperour vnderstandeth the words which yet is most vntrue for Nicolas sayth no such thing but onely that the Councell maketh the custome of the Romane Church the patterne for others to follow But the eight generall Councell which no doubt vnderstood the words of the Nicene Fathers farre better then Bellarmine sheweth plainely that the meaning of the Nicene Canon was that the Bishop of Alexandria should haue power ouer Aegypt and the prouinces pertaining to it to confirme the Metropolitanes in the same seeing the like custome preuaileth in the Romane Church And this Councell confirmeth the same distinction of the bounds of iurisdiction within which euery Patriarch is to containe himselfe both for old Rome and new and for the other Churches of Alexandria and Antioche The Canons of the Nicene Councell translated out of the Arabian tongue and published by Turrian Pisanus and Binnius will fully cleare this point if our Aduersaries giue any credit vnto them For in the eighth of those Canons the decree about the meaning whereof wee contend is thus set downe Constitutum est vt Episcopus Aegypti id est Patriarcha Alexandrinus praesideat habeat potestatem totius Aegypti that is It is ordained that the Bishop of Aegypt that is the Patriarch of Alexandria shall sit as President and haue power ouer all Aegypt and ouer all places Citties and Townes which are round about it because soe it is fit and because likewise the Bishop of Rome that is the Successour of Peter the Apostle hath power ouer all the Citties and places which are about Rome And in like sort let the Bishop of ANTIOCH haue power ouer that whole prouince c. But because perhaps these Canons though published by themselues as rare secrets of Antiquity lately brought to light will be of litle credit with them I will adde one reason more which to me seemeth very forcible to confirme our interpretation of the words of the Nicene Fathers There was aunciently a great contention betweene the Church of Rome and the Church of Constantinople about the Churches of Bulgaria either of these Churches making claime thereunto and seeking to bring them within the compasse of their owne Iurisdiction which contention could not haue beene if the one of these two Churches had had an illimited extent of Iurisdiction But that neither of them had any such illimited Iurisdiction it is euident in that neither Constantinople nor Rome vrge any such thing for iustification of their claime but stand vpon their conuerting of the people of Bulgaria to the Christian faith and the planting of religion amongst them Which either of these pretending rather then other sought thereby to iustifie a title of iurisdiction and authority ouer them Wherefore resoluing that we haue the true meaning of the Nicene canon let vs returne thither whence we haue a litle digressed namely to the discourse of Patriarchical Churches and Bishops set in order and honour before all other These as I haue already shewed were at first but three to which afterwards two other were added First Constantinople and afterwards Hierusalem Touching the Church and Bishop of Constantinople after that city was by Constantine made the seate of the Empire and thereby as much or more honoured then any city in the world the Bishop thereof before little esteemed grew exceeding great and in the second Councell which was the first of Constantinople was made a Patriarch in degree of honour next the Bishop of Rome and before the other two And againe in the Councell of Chalcedon confirmed in the same And though Leo resisted against this act of the Councell of Chalcedon and peremptorily protested that he would not suffer the Church of Alexandria to loose the dignity of the second See and the Church of Antioch of the third and his successours many of them persisted in the
of pride to preferre thy selfe before them what else doest thou say but I will ascend into heauen and exalt my seate aboue the Starres of heauen Are not all the Bishoppes of the Church cloudes who by the wordes of their preaching powre downe the graces of GOD like showers of raine and shine through the light of good workes whom whiles your brotherhood despising seeketh to bring vnder it selfe what other thing doth it say but this which is said of the old enemy I will ascend aboue the heighth of the cloudes And a little after the same Gregory addeth Surely Peter the Apostle was the first member of the holy and vniuersall Church Paul Andrew and Iohn what other thing are they but heads of particular parts of the people and Church of God and yet notwithstanding they are all members of the Church vnder one head Thus doth this holy man and worthy Bishop dislike that any amongst the Bishops of the Christian Church should bee so proud and insolent as to seeke to bee ouer all and subiect to none to subiect vnto himselfe all the members of Christ as to a head and to challenge vnto himselfe to bee vniuersall Bishoppe for that if any such bee if hee fall into errour or heresie hee draweth all other with him and ouerthroweth the state of the whole church Yet doe the Romane Bishoppes at this day take all these thinges vnto themselues for they subiect all Christs members to themselues as to Heads of the vniuersall church vpon perill of euerlasting damnation they will bee subiect to none or haue any to bee ouer them so that all depends of them their standing is the stay of all and their fall the ruine of all and if they erre all erre But perhaps it will be said that the name of vniuersall Bishop is not simply euill nor these claimes simply to be disliked but when they are made by them to whom it pertaineth not to make them such as the Bishops of Constantinople were Surely this evasion will not serue the turne For Gregory saith in the same place that no Bishop of Rome euer assumed this title ne dum priuatum aliquid darétur vni honore debito Sacerdotes priuarentur vniuersi that is Lest while some singular thing were giuen to one all Bishops should be depriued of their due honour thereby shewing that this title and the claimes accompanying it are simply to bee disliked as preiudiciall to the state of the whole Church the honour dignity of all other Bishops by whomsoeuer they be made Some man perhaps will be desirous to know how our Aduersaries seeke to decline the evidence of this cleare testimony of so great a Romane Bishoppe witnessing against them in a matter of so great consequence I will therefore set downe briefly in this place what I find any where said by any of them in answere to this authority The credit of the Author is such that they dare take no exception a-against him and the generality of his speech is such that what he disliketh in the Constantinopolitane Bishop he confesseth to be euill in any other and particularly in the Bishop of Rome And therefore the onely thing that they can deuise whereby to darken the cleare light of truth is this that the Bishop of Constantinople did so and in such sence challenge to be vniuersall Bishop that hee onely would haue beene a Bishop and there should haue beene no more then which nothing could be more absurdly sayd For the thing that the Romane Bishops disliked in those of Constantinople was not the putting of all other from being Bishops but the preferring themselues before other the subjecting of other to themselues the incroching vpon the priuileges and rights of other and the challenging of the power of ordination and confirmation of them whom it pertained not to them to ordaine or confirme as appeareth by the Epistles of Leo blaming Anotolius for subjecting all vnto himselfe for depriuing other Metropolitanes of their due honour by encroaching vpon their rights and for taking vpon him to ordaine the Bishop of Antioch who was one of the Patriarches That the Bishops of Constantinople sought not so to be vniuer all Bishops that there should be no other Bishops but they only is most euident by the Epistles of Leo and Gregorie in that they ordained Bishops themselues and are blamed by them for presuming to ordaine such as they should not haue ordained Wherefore the most that they can be conceiued to haue desired and sought in assuming the title of vniuersality is no more but the inuesting of the fulnesse of all power and jurisdiction Ecclesiasticall originally in themselues and thereby the subjecting of all other to a necessity of deriuing ministeriall power and authority from them of seeking ordination at their hands and being in all things pertaining to Episcopall office subiect to them all which things are challenged by the Bishop of Rome For the Romanists at this day teach that the fulnesse of all power and jurisdiction Ecclesiasticall is originally in the Pope that he communicateth a part thereof vnto others with such limitations as seemeth best vnto himselfe that all other Bishops receiue their jurisdiction from him that all the Bishops of the world cannot iudge him that hee may dispose of all the kingdomes of the world that his standing is the stay of all that his fall would be the ruine of all and that therefore we must perswade our selues hee cannot erre And hence indeed it followeth that he onely is Bishop in truth and that there are no other For if the Pope may take from any Bishop so often as he seeth cause as many as he pleaseth of them that are subject to him if hee may reserue vnto himselfe what cases he will and inhibite Bishops to meddle with them if hee may giue leaue to preach minister Sacraments and to do all other Ecclesiasticall duties to whom he will within any Diocese of the world if in generall councels where the power of jurisdiction is principally exercised where the great affaires of the Church are treated of where doubts are resolued controuersies determined articles of faith defined and lawes made that bind the whole Church he haue so absolute power that he is neither bound to follow the greater nor the lesser part of Bishops there present but may determine what hee pleaseth when they haue all done sayd what they can If the assurance of finding out the truth and decreeing that which is good behoofefull rest not partly in him partly in them but only in him as our Aduersaries teach then are Bishops indeed no Bishops no judges of controuersies but counsellers only to aduise the Pope no Law-giuers to the Church but such as must receiue lawes from the Pope no commaunders in their own right in the Church in any degree but meere Lieuetenantes or to speake more truly and properly vassals to the Pope CHAP. 33. Of the proofes brought by
in brotherly sort wished the Bishop of Antioch to resist heretiques and to let him vnderstand of the state of the Churches and to be a consort of the Apostolique See in this care to see that the priuiledges of the third See were not deminished by any mans ambition assuring him that whensoeuer he will do any thing for the aduancing of the dignity of the See of Antioch he also will be ready to concurre with him In all which passages betweene Leo and the Bishop of Antioch there is nothing found that hath any shew of proofe of the Popes supremacie Fourthly we say that Cyrill the Patriarch of Alexandria besought Leo to giue noe consent to the attempts of Iuuenall Bishop of Hierusalem seeking to prejudice the Church of Antioch to subject Palaestina to himselfe but that he besought Leo not to permit nor suffer Palaestina to be taken from Antioch and subjected to the Church of Hierusalem as if the whole power of permitting or hindring this thing had rested in Leo is but the false report of the Cardinall according to his wonted manner of misse-alleaging authors for the the aduantage of his cause So that the disposition of this matter rested not wholly in Leo but his concurrence with the Bishops of Antioch and Alexandria was necessary for the withstanding of the attempts of Iuuenall which his concurrence and helpe hee promised the Bishop of Antioch as we haue already heard and was euer ready to yeeld the same vnto him Fiftly we say that Leo did not command Dioscorus the Patriarch of Alexandria but whereas the manner was when the Patriarches were first elected ordained that they should mutually consent one to another and that hee who was newly ordained should send vnto the rest his Synodall letters and testimonies of his lawfull election and ordination Dioscorus being newly elected appointed Patriarch of Alexandria sendeth his Synodall letters to Leo Bishop of Rome that so he might giue his consent receiue embrace him as his fellow Patriarch Leo that these beginnings of Dioscorus might be more sure and firme nothing wanting to perfection fatherly as more ancient and brotherly as of the same ranke with him putting him in mind of some differences betweene their two Churches about the time of the ordination of Ministers and for that it seemed not likely vnto him that Marke the scholler of Peter tooke any other order in this behalfe then Peter did saith vnto him Wee will haue you to obserue that which our Fathers euer obserued making this a condition of the allowance consent he was to yeeld vnto him and vrging the practice of the Apostles sayth hee shall do well if obeying these Apostolicall institutions he shall cause that forme of ordination to be kept in the Churches ouer which God hath set him which is obserued in the Churches of the West that Ministers of the Church may be ordained onely on the Lords day on which day the creation of the world was begun in which Christ rose in which death was destroyed and life after which there is no death tooke beginning in which the Apostles receaued frō the Lord the trūpet of preaching the Gospel the ministration of the Sacrament of regeneration Sixtly we say that Leo intermedleth in the Churches of Africa and requireth some ordained contrary to the Canons to be put from their places tollerateth others and willeth the cause of Lupicinus a Bishop who had appealed vnto him to be heard there because he was Patriarch of the West and these parts of Africa were within his Patriarchship and that yet this his intermedling in so particular sort with the affaires of the Africane Churches was not very pleasing vnto those of Africa as shall appeare by that which followeth Lastly we say that the Church of Rome was the head of all Churches in the sence before expressed and had a presidence of order and honour amongst them and had in that sort as Leo truly saith more subject to it then euer were vnder the Romane Empire but vnder any absolute supreme commanding power of the Church of Rome they were not But saith Bellarmine if the former testimonies of Leo be auoided there is one more yet behind so cleare and full for the supremacie of the Pope that nothing can be sayd in answere vnto it in his Epistle to Anastasius Bishop of Thessalonica His words are these Amongst the most blessed Apostles like in honour there was a certaine difference and distinction of power and whereas they were equally chosen yet notwithstanding it was giuen to one of them to haue a preeminence amongst the rest from which forme the distinctiō and difference that is amongst Bishops hath taken beginning and by a most wise disposition it hath beene prouided that all without difference shall not challenge all vnto thēselues but that there should be in seuerall prouinces seuerall Bishops whose sentence judgment should be first and chiefe amongst the brethren and againe certaine other constituted and placed in greater cities who might take the care of more then the former by whom the care of the whole Church might flow vnto that one seate of Peter and nothing any where might dissent from the head These words truely make a goodly shew and may seeme most strongly to proue the supremacie that the Popes now challenge but in very deede they most powerfully ouerthrow it For the Bishops of Rome will neuer be perswaded in proportionable sort as is expressed in the words of Leo to challenge no more in respect of the whole Church then the Metropolitane Bishops doe in respect of their Provinces and the Patriarches in respect of their Churches of a larger extent For then they must doe nothing but accordingly as they shall bee swayed by the major part of the voyces of the Bishops of the Christian Church For the Metropolitane may doe nothing in his province nor the Patriarch in his larger extent but as they shall be directed swayed by the major part of the voices of their Bishops and yet surely the meaning of Leo was not to giue so much to the Bishop of Rome in respect of all Christian Bishops as pertaineth to the Metropolitanes and Patriarches in respect of their Bishops For the Metropolitane is to ordaine the Bishops of the Province and the Patriarch to ordaine and confirme the Metropolitanes by imposition of hands or mission of the Pall but the Pope neuer had any such power in respect of the Patriarches who were onely to send their Synodall Epistles to him testifying their faith as he likewise to them without expecting any other confirmation then that mutuall consent whereby one of them assured of the right faith and lawfull ordination of another receiued and embraced each other as fellowes and colleagues So that that care of the vniversall Church which Leo saith floweth together and commeth vp to that one chaire of Peter is to be vnderstood only in respect of things concerning the common faith
Emperours charges But there are many things that bewray it to be a mere counterfeit For first it hath a sencelesse title for it is named another Romane Councell vnder Syluester the first whereas no man can tell of any besides this Secondly it is fronted with a briefe Epilogue in steed of a Preface Thirdly there is scarce any sence to bee made of any one sentence throughout the whole Fourthly it is sayd to consist of 139 Bishops out of the citty of Rome or not farre from it and the rest out of Greece whereas all men know the citty of Rome had but one Bishop so that it was sencelesse to say there were in that Councell 139 Bishops out of the citty of Rome or not farre from it And besides all men see how silly a thing it was to muster so many names of Bishops without specifying the places whereof they were Bishops Fiftly whereas it is said to haue consisted of 284 Bishops out of the citty of Rome and places neere to it and out of Greece as if it had beene a generall Councell it is strange that the Histories reporting farre meaner Councels then this is supposed to haue beene should neuer make any mention of this nor the occasion of calling it Sixtly whereas the supposed Fathers of this Councel do condemne though in very sencelesse manner certaine vnknowne heretickes it is strange they should make no mention of the Arrians who were famous and at that time troubled all the East Seuenthly the end why these supposed Fathers met was ridiculous For thus it is expressed i Vt Ecclesiae regia non vatieinentur sed sit fiâ—…ma claudat ostium propter persecutorem Or as another Edition hath it Vt Ecclesia regia non vacilletur sed sit firma claudat ostium propter persecutorem For why should these good men forbid the kingly Churches to prophecie or why should they feare the shaking or tottering of them or shut the doore for feare of the persecutor after Constantine was become a Christian baptized by Syluester and in requitall of his kindnesse had giuen him all the Empire of the West Lastly whereas the manner of Councels was that the Bishops sate round in a compasse the Presbyters sate behind them and the Deacons stood before them the Councell of Carthage forbiddeth a Bishop to sit suffer a Presbyter to stand Hierome sheweth that euen in Rome the manner was that Presbyters did sit and Deacons stand here it is noted that none sate but Bishops These things being obserued touching the credit of this Councel let vs come to the Decrees of it by which the Pope would exempt himselfe from all iudgment of men whatsoeuer villanyes he should chance to commit Thus then the Decrees of this sacred Synode are passed in fauour of the Pope First it is decreed that no Presbyter à die onus Presbyterij latine fitter for Hog-heards then Bishops shall marry and that if he do hee shall loose his honour for 12. yeares Secondly it is ordered thus That if any one shall do against this present hand-writing hee shall be condemned for euer For let no man iudge the first See for neither shall the Iudge be iudged of Augustus nor of all the Clergy nor of Kings nor People These sencelesse Decrees of a fained ridiculous Synode our aduersaries such is their pouerty in this cause bring forth as good authorities for the Pope But I thinke the reader will not much be moued with them vnlesse it be to pitty those that liued before vs who were abused with such fooleries and shamelesse forgeries and to giue thankes to God that hath giuen vs meanes to descry the cozening deuices of Satans Agents Neither doth it any thing assure vs of the truth of this Councel that Pope Nicholas was coÌ„tent to make vse of it in his Epistle to Michael the Emperor of Constantinople seeing he citeth also in the same Epistle the Romane Synode vnder Sixtus the third in the cause of Polychronius Bishop of Hierusalem whereas yet not withstanding Binnius saith confidently that euery learned man wil pronounce the acts of it to be counterfeit if he attend the names of the Consuls in whose times it is supposed to haue bin holden the name of him that was accused and other things described in those supposed pretended acts To these they adde another authority as it may seeme of the same stamp out of the Councell of Rome vnder Sixtus the third which they endeuour to strengthen with certaine sayings out of a booke of one Euodius a Deacon admitted and allowed in the fifth Councell vnder Symmachus The Romane Councell vnder Sixtus was called to examine a very foule fact wherewith Sixtus was charged which was the abusing of one Chrysogonet a professed and consecrated virgin In this Councell Sixtus presented himselfe and professed that it was in his power choice either to submit himselfe to the iudgment of the Councell or to refuse it yet voluntarily referred his cause to be there heard whence our Auersaries suppose they may inferre that all the world may not iudge the Pope against his will The Barbarismes manifold senceles absurdities that are found in this Councell may iustly make us suspect it of forgery But admitting it to haue bin a lawfull Synode no such thing can be concluded out of it as our aduersaries dreame of For it was but a Diocesan Synode there was neuer a Bishop in it besides Sixtus whom they went about to iudge And therefore it was not to be maruailed at if Sixtus said it was in his power and choice whether hee would be iudged by the Presbyters Deacons of his owne Church or not seeing no Bishop be he neuer so meane may be judged by the Clergy of his own Church but by the Synode of the Bishops of the prouince and therefore I greatly feare they wil hardly draw a good argument froÌ„ hence to proue that the Pope may not at all be iudged For I think it will not follow Maximus the exconsul said it was not lawful for those Lay-men inferiour Clergy-men theÌ„ assembled to giue sentence against the B of Rome the B himselfe protested that he might chuse whether he would be judged by them or not therefore the whole Christian world may not judge the Pope Wherefore let vs come to the sayings of Euodius see whether they confirme the Romish conceipt any better The occasioÌ„ of the writing of this booke of Euodius was this Symmachus the Bishop of Rome being charged with certaine grieuous crimes was to bee judged in a Synode called by Theodoricus the King not without his own coÌ„sent To this Councel he was willing to come and to submit him selfe to the judgement of it onely hee desired restitution of such things as had beene taken from him till he were convicted which he could not obtaine and yet presented himselfe in the Synode But such was the
might not nor did not iudge any B. of himselfe alone 2 That being B. of the first See he with his associates might iudge any other B. or Patriarch but no particular Patriarch with his Bishops might iudg him his because there is no particular person or company of men greater then he and his being chiefe Patriarch of the world but that both hee and his may bee iudged by a generall Councell it appeareth by the eight generall Councell wherein the words now vrged are recited For that Councell taketh order that all the Patriarches shall bee honoured and respected and especially the Bishop of Rome and forbiddeth any man to compose any billes or writings against him vnder pretence of some crimes wherewith they will charge him as Dioscorus did but that if there bee a generall Councell and any question bee moued touching the Romane Church they may in reuerent and due sort determine the same though they may not proceede contemptuously against the Romane Bishop And so first the Councell of Nice gaue lawes as to the other two Patriarches so likewise to the Bishoppe of Rome and included him within his owne bounds and limits Secondly the Councell of Chalcedon made the Bishoppe of Constantinople a Patriarch and the Bishoppe of Romes Peere notwithstanding the resistance of those that were there present on the behalfe of Leo then Bishop of Rome and the other Bishops of the West And this decree in the end preuailed so that after much contradiction and long continued opposition the Bishops of Rome were forced to yeeld vnto it Thirdly generall Councels reexamined and iudged againe thinges iudged by the Bishop of Rome and his Bishops as the Councell of Chalcedon reexamined the iudgement of Leo against Dioscorus and for Theodoret. And the sixth generall Councell the iudgement of Pope Martine with his Synodes against Pyrrhus and Sergius and the eighth the judgments of Nicholas and Adrian against Photius Augustine speaking of the sentence of the 70. Bishoppes against Caecilianus retracted and reuersed by Melchiades Bishop of Rome and his colleagues whom vpon the suites of the Donatists Constantine appointed to heare the matter sayth they therefore appealed to the judgements of the Bishops beyond the Seas that if by any falsehood and slaunders they could preuaile they might gaine the cause if not they might say as all men that haue ill causes are wont to do that they met with bad judges But sayth hee let vs grant that those Bishops that judged the matter at Rome were not good Iudges yet there remained a generall Councell of the whole Church for them to flye vnto where the matter might anew haue beene handled with the former Iudges that their sentences might be reuersed if they should haue beene conuinced to haue judged ill Which thing if they did let them make it appeare vnto vs. Wee proue they did not because all the world communicated with Caecilianus and not with Donatus and his adherents So that either they neuer brought the matter to be scanned in a generall Councell or else they were therein condemned also Here wee See hee clearely acknowledgeth the generall Councell to haue power to reexamine and reuerse the judgement of the Bishoppe of Rome and his colleagues Saint Gregory likewise acknowledgeth the vniuersall Church to be greater then hee and his For professing to follow the direction of Christ in the matter betweene him and the Bishop of Constantinople who willeth vs if our brother offend against vs to go and admonish him betweene him and vs if then he heare vs not to take two or three with vs that in the mouth of two or three witnesses euery word may stand and if he heare not them then to tell the Church he sayth that he had first sent to the Bishop of Constantinople and by his messengers admonished him in all gentle and louing sort and that now he writeth vnto him omitting nothing that in all humility he ought to doe but that seeing hee is thus despised there remaineth nothing but that he vse the helpe of the Church for the repressing of the insolencie of this man soe preiudiciall to the state of the whole Church Fourthly generall Councels haue by their decrees ordained many things concerning the See of Rome either enlarging or limitting the power of it and the exercise of the same as it seemed good vnto them as we see in the Councell of Sardica Hosius with the Bishops there assembled resolued in the honour of the memory of Peter to make a Decree that Bishoppes condemned by the Bishoppes of their owne Prouinces might appeale to the Bishop of Rome and that it might be lawfull for him vpon such appeale to write to the Bishops of the next Prouince to reexamine the matter againe And if hee pleased to send some from himselfe to sit with them in joynt commission Neither did the Bishoppes of Rome Zozimus Bonifacius and Caelestinus vrge the law of Christ or the right of Saint Peter to justifie their claime of receiuing appeales out of Africa but the Decrees of the Nicene Councell And this is farther confirmed in that the Bishops in the Councell of Chalcedon say the Fathers gaue the preheminence to the Bishop of Rome in ancient times because it was the seat of the Empire and that therefore now they would giue the like to Constantinople now become the seat of the Empire and named new Rome And as generall Councels gaue preheminences to the Romane Bishops so also they restrained and limited them in the vse of their jurisdiction when they saw them to incroch too much as the Councell of Sardica tooke order that they should not meddle with the causes of Presbyters and inferiour Clergy-men vpon any appeale but leaue them to to their owne Bishops and the Synodes of the Prouinces and in the case of Bishops appealing not to reuerse the acts of the Synode of any prouince without another Synode of the Bishops of the next Prouince And the Councels of Chalcedon and Constantinople the eighth decreed that the Bishop Rome and the other Patriarches shall confirme the Metropolitanes subject vnto them by sending the Pall or by imposition of handes but shall not intermeddle in the ordination of Bishoppes Fifthly it appeareth that the Romane Bishops are inferiour to the whole Church First in that their Legates rise vp when they speake in generall Councels And secondly in that in the councell of Ephesus when they with others were sent by the councell to the Emperour they were willed precisely to follow the directions and instructions giuen them For that if they did not all their proceedings should bee voided and they rejected from the communion of the rest Sixthly in that the sixth generall councell particularly giueth lawes to the Church of Rome For in the thirteenth canon it reprehendeth the Romane Church because it forbiddeth Presbyters Deacons and Subdeacons to liue in matrimoniall society with their wiues
though the times would be such as that many swords would not suffice to defend them yet that these two were enough because he meant to vse none at all but to suffer all that the malice of his enemies could doe vnto him This Maldonatus deliuereth to be the literall sense of Christs wordes sheweth a mysticall sense of them also out of Beda much more apt then that of Bonifacius Duo gladii saith Beda sufficiunt ad testimonium sponte passi Salvatoris Vnus qui Apostolis audaciam pro Domino certandi evulsà ictu eius auriculâ Domino etiam morituro pietatem virtutemque doceret inesse medicandi Alter quinequaquam vaginâ exemptus ostenderet eos nec totum quod potuere pro eius defensione facere permissos that is Two swords are sufficient to giue testimony vnto our Sauiour that he suffered willingly The one of which might shew that the Apostles wanted no courage to fight for their Master and by the eare that was cut off by the stroke thereof and healed againe by the Lord that he wanted neither piety to compassionate the miserable nor vertue and power to make him whole that was hurt though now hee were ready to dye And the other which neuer was drawne out of the sheath might shew that they were not permitted to doe all that they could haue done in his defence It is not to be denyed but that S. Bernard mystically expounding the words of Christ saith the Church hath two swords of authority But he thinketh it hath them in very different sort For it hath the vse of the one and the benefite of the other The one is to bee drawne by it the other for it So that this is all that hee saith that the sword of ciuill authority is to be vsed by the Souldiers hand at the commaund of the Emperour by the direction and at the suite of the Church From Bonifacius they passe to Innocentius the third who in the vacancy of the Empire willed those that were wronged in their rightfull causes to haue recourse either to some Bishop or to himselfe And Clemens the fifth who professeth to intermeddle with certaine secular businesses affaires and to determine certaine ciuill causes vpon three seuerall grounds Whereof the first is his greatnesse making him superiour to the Emperour The second his being in steed of the Emperour in the vacancy of the Empire And the third the fulnesse of power which Christ the King of Kings and Lord of Lords gaue vnto Peter and in him to his successours Whatsoeuer wee thinke of the former of these two Popes who seemeth to ground his intermedling in ciuill affaires vpon some law of the Empire and concession of ciuill Princes accordingly as we reade of Theodosius that he permitted any Lay-men hauing ciuill differences among themselues to referre the same to Ecclesiasticall Iudges if they listed Which concession proceeding ex pietate not ex debito that is out of piety and not out of any right or necessity that it must bee soe is long since growne out of vse the state of Church-men beeing much changed from that it was when hee granted them that priuiledge as Duarenus sheweth Yet Pope Clemens can by no meanes be excused from hereticall impiety affirming that which is most vntrue as may appeare by the many fold reasons brought before to proue the contrary nor from Antichristian pride in seeking to tread vnderneath his feete the crownes and dignities of Kings and Princes and to lift himselfe vp aboue all that is called God CHAP. 45. Of the Popes vnjust claime to intermeddle with the affaires of Princes and their states if not as soueraigne Lord ouer all yet at least in Ordine ad spiritualia and in case of Princes failing to do their duties THAT Christ was no earthly King that he left no Kingly power to Peter and that the Pope hath no meere temporall power in that he is Christs Vicar or Peters successor it is most euident out of the former discourse and the Cardinall Iesuite confesseth so much and yet he thinketh the Pope hath a supreme power to dispose of all temporall states and things in ordine ad bonum spirituale that is in a kinde of reference to the procuring and setting forward of the spirituall good But this fancy is most easily refuted by vnanswerable reasons presupposing his former concession For first no man can take away limit or restraine any power or the excercise of it but he in whom it is in eminent sort and from whom it was receiued But the ciuill power that is in Princes is not in the Pope neither did it proceede and come originally from him therefore it cannot be restrained limited or taken away by him The maior proposition is euident the assumption is proued because ciuill power is in heathen infidels who no way hold of the Pope Secondly because it is agreed by all Diuines of worth and learning that the ciuill power in the first originall of it is immediately from God or if not immediately by his owne deliuery thereof yet by no other mediation then that of the law of nature and nations The Emperours know saith Tertullian who gaue them the Empire they know that it was euen the same God who gaue vnto them to be men and to haue humane soules They well perceiue that he onely is God in whose onely power they are à quo sunt secundi post quem primi ante omnes super omnes Deos that is After whom they are in order the second but among all other the first before and aboue all Gods And againe Inde est Imperator vnde homo antequam Imperator inde potest as illi vnde spiritus that is From thence is the chiefe ruler and Emperor whence he was a man before hee was an Emperour from thence hath hee his power from whence he receiued the spirit of life The Author of the answer to the reports of a great and worthy Iudge among vs who hath lately written in the defence of the Popes ouerspreading greatnesse seemeth in part to agree with Tertullian and telleth vs that ciuill power is receiued from God not immediately by his owne deliuery thereof but mediately rather by the mediation of the law of nature and nations For by the law of nature God hath ordained that there should be politicke gouernment which the law of nations assuming hath transferred that gouernment to one or more according to the diuers formes thereof And Occam proueth at large that Imperiall power is not from the Pope and that it is hereticall to say that all lawfull ciuil power is from the Pope Our second reason is this Absolute soueraigne ciuill Princes while they were infidels had true dominion rule and authority holding it as immediatly from God not depending on any ruler of the church as hath beene shewed before But when they become Christians they still remaine in the
the great he dyed and Ludouicus his sonne succeeded him Lotharius succeeded Ludouicus and Ludouicus his sonne succeeded him Carolus Caluus his vncle succeeded Ludouicus Carolus Crassus his brother Ludouicus son succeeded him This Carolus Crassus for his vnfitnesse was put from the Empire and Arnulphus his nephew son of Carlomaine was chosen in his place who was the last of the race of Charles the great that was crowned Emperour whom Ludouicus his son succeeded but was neuer crowned In whom dying without childrē the race of Charles did wholy cease After him Otho the Duke of Saxony was greatly desired but refusing to bee Emperour in respect of his old age the French by his aduice chose Conradus and Conradus when he dyed named Henry the sonne of Otho Duke of Saxony who reigned in East-France But vpon the death of Ludouicus the third the Lombards possessed themselues of the Empire in Italy eight of them successiuely holding it for the space of 50 yeres till Otho the sonne of Matilda daughter of Theodoricus king of the Saxons Henry the king who succeeding his father being very famous for the things he had done in France Germany was desired by Agapetus the Pope many nobles of Italy now weary of the tyranny of the Lombards to come and releeue them which he did and entring Italy with 50000. armed men put Berengarius the Lombard from the Empire and Albertus from the kingdome of all Italy was crowned Emperour in Rome by Iohn the twelfth who died Emperour and Otho the second his son succeeded him and Otho the third his sonne succeeded him This third Otho as Nauclerus saith hauing no heires male by the aduice with the consent of the Princes of Germany made a Decree that after the death of the Emperour an election of the new Emperour to succeede should for euer bee made in the citty of Franckford and appointed electors three Arch-bishops of Mentz for Germany of Coleyn for Italy and of Treuers for France and with these foure other secular Princes to wit the Palatine of Rhene who by office should be the Emperors Pantler the Duke of Saxony who should be his Marshall the Marquesse of Branderburge who was to be his Chamberlaine the King of Boheme who was to be chief Butler This ordinance greatly displeased the Romanes yet notwithstanding Gregory the fifth then Pope who was a Germane borne of the Emperours house seeing how hardly Otho the Emperour came to the Empire though it were his inheritance called a Synode and with the consent of the Princes of Germany confirmed the ordinance of the Emperour decreed that these 7 electors should for euer haue power to chuse the Emperor in the name of all who being chosen should bee called Caesar king of Romanos after his coronation by the Pope be named Augustus Emperour Cardinall Cusanus saith the Emperor Otho with the consent of the nobles Primates and both the states of the Clergy people ordained electors in the time of Gregory the 5. who was a Germane decreed that they should haue power for euer to chuse the Emperor in steed of all It is not therefore to be granted saith hee that the Princes electors haue their power of chusing the Emperor from the Pope so that without his consent they should not haue it or that he might take it from them if he would Who therefore gaue the people of Rome power to chuse the Emperor but the law of God nature whence the Electors appointed by the cōmon consent of all the Germanes and other subiect to the Empire in the time of Henry the second haue their power originally from the common consent of them all who by natures right had power to constitute them an Emperour and not from the Bishop of Rome who hath no power to giue to any prouince of the world a King or Emperour without the consent thereof But the consent of Gregory the 5. who as Bishop of Rome in his degree and place had interest to giue voyce in the chusing of the Emperour concurred with the resolution of the Princes people The sixt instance is of Gregory the 7. deposing Henry the 4. who indeed was the first Pope that euer tooke vpon him to depose Emperour or King Wherefore for the better vnderstanding of the whole course of the proceedings of this Pope wee must obserue that in the time of Henry the 3. about the yeare of our Lord 1040. there was an horrible confusion of Gods Church and people in the citty of Rome three seuerall pretenders inuading the chaire of Peter and challenging the name of his successours and which more increased the misery the reuenues of the Church were diuided among these three and seuerall Patriarchicall places assigned to them one of them sitting at S. Peters another at S. Mary the greater and the third named Benedict in the palace of Lateran and all of them liued very lewdly wickedly as Otho saith the Romanes reported vnto him being in Rome A certaine religious Presbyter named Gratian considering this miserable state of the Church taking pitty on his distressed mother moued with the zeale of piety went to the three pretenders and perswaded them for money to leaue the holy seate of Peter assigning to Benedict as being of greater esteeme among them the reuenues of England for his maintenance and as a recompence of his voluntary relinquishing the claime to the Popedome The citizens of Rome admiring the happy atchieuement of this Presbyter chose him to bee Pope as being the deliuerer of the Church from so great a schisme and changing his name called him Gregory the 7. But when Henry the King heard of it he passed into Italy Gratian vnderstanding of his comming met him at Sutrium and to pacifie his wrath offered him a precious Diademe The King at the first honorably receiued him but afterwards calling a Councell of Bishoppes induced him to giue ouer the Popedome as hauing by Symony obtayned it at the first and with the consent of the Romane church placed Suidegerus Bishop of Babenberge in the Papal chaire who was named Clemens This Clemens dyed Popio Patriarch of Aquileia succeeded him and was named Damasus Damasus dyed and Bruno Bishop of the Tullians succeeded him and was named Leo. This man being of a noble race in France was appointed Pope by the authority of the Emperour and hauing put on the Papall purple robe journeyed through France til he came to Cluniack where one Hildebrand was Priour This Hildebrand moued with zeale came to Leo and told him hee did ill to assume the Papall office by vertue of the Emperours nomination being a Lay-man but that if hee would be aduised by him he would direct him into a course whereby he might without offending the Emperour preserue the liberty of the Church in chusing her chiefe Bishop This aduice Leo hearkned vnto and putting off his purple robe put on the weede of
detestable Beast of pride hath crept vp euen to the seate of Peter Prouide alwayes well for the peace of the Church and fare you alwayes well Thus wee see how the popes not contenting themselues with the fulnesse of Ecclesiasticall jurisdiction though they had no just title vnto it proceeded yet further partly by the fauour of Christian princes and partly by fraud and violence got to be great princes in the world stayed not till they made challēge to be ouer the mightiest Emperors to dispose of their crowns dignities So shewing thēselues to haue the perfect marke and character of him of whom the Apostle speaketh Who sitteth in the temple of God as God and is lifted vp aboue all that is called God Yet could they not so prevaile in these their hellish practises nor so carry away the truth of GOD and the liberty of his Church into captiuity but that there were euer found both Christian Emperours and learned Diuines to resist them in their vniust claimes CHAP. 48. Of generall Councels and of the end vse and necessity of them HAuing examined what may be said for proofe of the Vniuersality of the Bishop of Romes power and iurisdiction first we finde that the Sonne of GOD gaue him no power in the common-wealth but a Father-hood onely in the Church Secondly that in the Church hee neither gaue him an illimited power of commaunding nor infallible iudgement in discerning but that the greatest thing that either hee canne challenge or wee yeeld vnto him is to be the prime Bishop in order and honour the first and not of himselfe alone or out of the fulnesse of his owne power but with the joynt concurrence of others equall in commission with him to manage the great affaires of Almighty God and to gouerne the Christian Church so that the fulnesse of Ecclesiasticall power and iurisdiction is in the companies assemblies and Synodes of Bishoppes and Pastors and not in any one man alone I shewed before that in the churches founded and established by the Apostles contayning whole Citties and places adjoyning though there were many ministers of the word and sacraments yet one was so the Pastour of each of these Churches that the rest were but his assistants and might doe nothing without him and that therefore there was an inequality established euen from the beginning not of order onely but of degree also betweene such as are Pastours of Churches are named Bishops and such as are but their assistants named by the common name of Presbyters yet is the power of him that excelleth the rest in degree in each Church fatherly not Princely for things were so ordered in the beginning that as the Presbyters could do nothing without the Bishoppe so the Bishop in matters of moment might doe nothing without his Presbyters and thereupon the Councell of Carthage decreeth that the Bishoppe shall not presume to heare and sententiate any mans cause without the presence of his Clergie And though it bee said that the Bishop alone may heare and determine the causes of such Cleargy men as are below the degree of Presbyters Deacons yet that alone excludeth not his Cleargy but the concurrence of other Bishops which in the causes of Presbyters Deacons is necessarily required For without the presence and concurrence of his Cleargy the Bishop may proceede to no sentence at all If any difference grew betweene the Bishop and his Cleargy or if consenting any one found himselfe grieued with their proceedings there was a prouinciall Synode holdentwise euery yeare in which the acts of Episcopall Synodes might be re-ëxamined These prouinciall Synodes were subordinate to Nationall Patriarchicall Synodes wherein the Primate of a Nation or Kingdome or one of the Patriarches sat as President And in these Nationall or Patriarchicall Synodes the acts of prouinciall Synodes might bee re-ëxamined and reuersed Of all which I haue spoken before in due place and vpon fit occasion haue shewed at large of whom these Synodes doe consist So that it is euident that the power of Ecclesiasticall iurisdiction resteth not in Bishoppes alone but in Presbyters also beeing admitted to Prouinciall and Nationall Synodes and hauing decisiue voyces in them as well as Bishops nor in any one Metropolitane Primate or Patriarch within their seuerall precincts and diuisions but in these and their fellow Bishops joyntly and that much lesse there is any one in whom the fulnesse of all Ecclesiasticall power and the right to command the whole Church doth rest So that this fulnesse of power is found only in the generall assembly of Pastors called a generall Councell Wherefore now it remaineth that wee speake of Generall Councels Wherein first wee are to consider the vtility and necessity of such Synodall assemblies and meetings Secondly of whom they must consist Thirdly what assurance they haue of diuine assistance direction and Fourthly who must call them Toucing the first the causes why generall Councels are called are three The first is the suppressing of new heresies formerly not condemned The second a generall vniforme reformation of abuses crept into the Church The third the taking away of Schismes growing in Patriarchicall Churches about the election of their Pastors the reiecting of intruders violently and disorderly possessing themselues of those Patriarchicall Thrones And so wee finde that the Councell of Nice was called by Constantine for the suppressing of the damnable heresie of the Arrians the eight generall Councell by Basilius for the ending of the difference that was growne in the Church of Constantinople about Ignatius and Photius contending for the Episcopall chaire and that all Generall Councels intended and sought the reformation of abuses there being scarce any one wherein Canons were not made for the reformation of disorders in so much that the Fathers of the sixth Generall Councell hauing only condemned the Heresie of the Monothelites and made no Canons met afterwards againe many of them and made those Canons that are now extant and are the chiefe directiō of the Greeke Church vnto this day These being the causes for which Councels are called it is euident that the holding of them is not absolutely and simply necessary but in a sort onely For Heresies may bee suppressed by the concurrence of Prouinciall Synodes holden in the seuerall parts of the world as they were in the first 300. yeares when there were no Generall Councells But one part of the Christian Church seeking the helpe of another in common dangers and one part readily concurring with another as for the extinguishing of a dangerous fire threatning all or the repressing repelling of a common enemy by mutuall intelligence passing from one to another they abandoned Heresies newly springing vp and preserued the vnity of the common faith Neither was this course holden onely in the time of persecution during the first 300. yeares but afterwards also in the time of the Churches peace wee finde the same course to
Generall councell taketh order that the Patriarch shall haue power to convocate the Metropolitanes that are vnder him and that they shall not refuse to come when he calleth them vnlesse they be hindered by vrgent causes And to this purpose it was that the Bishops within the Patriarchship of Rome were once in the yeare to visite the Apostolicall thresholds which to do they take an oath still euen to this day as Cusanus noteth so that it is evident that there is a power in Bishoppes Metropolitanes Primates and Patriarchs to call Episcopall Provinciall Nationall and Patriarchicall Synodes and that neither so depending of nor subiect to the power of Princes but that when they are enemies to the Faith they may exercise the same without their consent and privity and subiect them that refuse to obey their summons to such punishments as the canons of the Church doe prescribe in cases of such contempt or wilfull negligence But that wee may see to whom the calling of Generall Councels doth pertaine in the times of persecution and when there are no Christian Princes we must obserue that among the Patriarches though one bee in order before another As the Patriarch of Alexandria is before the Patriarch of Antioch and the Patriarch of Rome before the Patriarch of Alexandria yet is not one of them superiour to another in degree as Bishops are to Presbyters nor so in order honour and place as Metropolitanes are to Bishops or Patriarches to Metropolitanes whom they are to ordaine or at the least to confirme And therefore no one of them singly and by himselfe alone hath power to call vnto him any Patriarch or any Bishop subiect to such Patriarch But as in case when there groweth a difference betweene the patriarches of one See and another or betweene any of the patriarches and the Metropolitanes and Bishops subiect to them the superiour patriarch not of himselfe alone but with his Metropolitanes and such particular Bishops as are interessed may judge and determine the differences between them if without danger of a further rent it may be done as in the case of Chrysostome and Theophilus it could not So if there be any matter of Faith or any thing concerning the whole state of the Christian church wherein a common deliberation of all the pastors of the church is necessary he that is in order the first among the patriarches with the Synodes of Bishops subiect to him may call the rest together as being the principall part of the church whence all actions of this nature doe take beginning And this is that which Iulius Bishop of Rome hath when writing to the Bishops of the East he telleth them that the manner and custome is that they should write to him and the Westerne Bishops first that from thence might be decreed the thing that is just and againe that they ought to haue written to them all that so that which is just might bee decreed by all And hence it is that Damasus Ambrose Brito Valerianus and the rest of the holy Bishops assembled in the great city of Rome out of their brotherly loue sent for the Bishops of the East as their owne members praying and desiring them to come vnto them that they might not raigne alone So that the power of calling Generall Councels when the church hath no princes to assist her is not in the Pope but in the Westerne Synode and yet hath not this Synode any power ouer all the other Churches as a supreme Commaunder but is onely as a principall part among the rest to beginne procure set forward as much as in her lyeth such things as pertain to the cōmon good neither may it by vertue of any canon custome or practise of the church excōmunicate the rest for refusing to hearken when it calleth as it appeareth by the former example in that they of the East came not when they were called and intreated to come to Rome by Damasus Ambrose and the rest but stayed at Constantinople did some things which they disliked and yet were forced to giue way vnto them and as being greater in authority then they bare the name of the generall Councell though they were assembled at Rome at the same time in a very great number But if the greater part concurre with them they may excommunicate those few that shall wilfully and causelesly refuse to obey them If it be said that hence it will follow that there is no certaine meanes of hauing a generall Councell at all times as there is of Prouinciall or Patriarchicall which may seeme absurde it will be answered that there is not the like necessitie of hauing Generall Councels as there is of hauing those more particular Synodes and that therefore it is not absurd to grant that the Church hath not at all times certaine and infallible meanes to haue a Generall Councell as it hath to haue the other Nay that it hath not it most plainely appeareth in that in the case of Chrysostome greatly distressed greiuously wronged Innocentius professed vnto him he knew no meanes to helpe him but a Generall Councell which to obtaine he became an humble futer to the Emperour but was so farre from preuailing that the messengers hee sent were returned backe againe vnto him with disgrace Thus wee see to whom the calling of Councels pertaineth when there is no Christian Magistrate to assist the Church but when there is a Christian Magistrate it pertaineth to him to see that these assemblies be duly holden accordingly as the necessity of the Church requireth and the Canons prescribe And therefor wee shall finde that though Christian Emperours Kings and Princes within their seuerall dominions oftentimes permitted Bishops Metropolitanes and Patriarches to hold Episcopall Prouinciall Nationall or Patriarchicall Councels without particular intermedling therein when they saw neither negligence in those of the Cleargy in omitting to hold such Councels when it was fit nor intrusion into their office yet soe often as they saw cause they tooke into their owne hands the power of calling these more particular Synodes And touching generall there was neuer any that was not called by the Emperour That Emperours Kings and Princes in their seuerall dominions respectiuely called particular Councels is proued by innumerable examples For Constantine the great called the first Councell of Arle as it appeareth by his Epistle to Crestus and Binnius confesseth it The Councell of Aquileia was called by the Emperours as it appeareth by the Epistle of the Councell to Gratian Valentinian and Theodosius the Emperours in the first Tome of the Councells The Councell of Burdegalis was called by the Emperour against Priscillian The Councell of Agatha by the permission of the King as as appeareth in the second Tome of the Councels The first of Orleans was called by Clodoueus The Epaunine Councell by Sigismund the sonne of Gundebald The second of Orleans by the command of Childebert the
and not these for being sent by men that haue authority though abusing the same they haue a true and lawfull Ministery till they be put from it by superiour authority else were all Ministration of Sacraments and other sacred things voyde performed by such as simoniacally or by sinister meanes get into these holy places The fourth are such as neither are sent of GOD nor of men nor by men but of them-selues of whom our Sauiour Christ saith all that came before me were theeues robbers and of whome almighty GOD pronounceth and sayth by the Prophet Ieremy I sent them not they 〈◊〉 I spake not to them they prophecied This euill is carefully to bee declined and therefore CHRIST would not suffer the diuels to speake that which was true least vnder the pretence of trueth errour might creepe in seeing hee that speaketh of him-selfe cannot but speake lyes These are the foure sortes of them that serue in the worke of the Ministery whereof the last haue no calling at all and all they doe is voide the Third haue a lawfull commission though they obtayned it by sinister meanes and bee vnworthy of it so that they could not bee put into it without the faulte of the ordayners The First had a lawfull but extraordinary calling needefull onely in those first beginnings of Christianity and not longer to continue The second haue that calling which is Ordinary and to continue whereof wee are now to speake In this calling there are three things implied Election Ordination and Assignation to some particular Church whereof men elected and ordained are appointed to take charge In ancient times there was no ordination at large without particular Assignation and sine titulo allowed as it appeareth by the Councell of Chalcedon forbidding any such thing to be done and voyding any such Act if it should bee done and therefore in those times the very electing and ordayning was an assigning of the elected ordayned to the place of Charge they were to take and a giuing of them the power of iurisdiction as wel as of order But this Canon in latter times grew out of vse whence ensued great confusions in the state of the Church as Duarenus rightly noteth yet are we not of opinion that all such ordinations are voyde in the nature of the thing whatsoeuer the Ancients pronounced of them according to the strictnesse of the Canons For seeing Ordination which is the sanctifying of men to the worke of the holy Ministery is a diffeernt thing in nature from the placing of them where they shal do that holy worke and a man once ordained needeth not any new Ordination when he is remoued from one Church to another it is euident that in the nature of the thing Ordination doth not so depend on the title and place of Charge the Ordayned entereth into as that Ordinations at large should bee voyd yet are they not to bee permitted neither are they in our Church For the Ordinations of Ministers in Colledges in our Vniuersities are not within the compasse of those prohibited Ordinations at large and sine titulo and none other by the order of our Church may bee Ordayned vnlesse he be certainly prouided of some definite place of charge imployment And as the Auncient were thus precise in admitting none into the holy Ministery but with assignation of the particular place of his imployment so they tooke as strict order that men once placed should not sodainly be remoued and translated to any other church or charge In the Councell of Sardica Hosius the President of that Councell sayd That same ill custome and pernicious corruption is wholy to be plucked vp by the rootes that it may not be lawfull for a Bishoppe to passe from his citie to any other city For the cause why they doe so is knowne to all seeing none is found to passe from a greater citie to a lesser whence it appeareth that they are inflamed with ardent desires of couetousnesse and that they serue their owne ambitious designes that they may exercise dominion and grow great If therefore it seeme good to you all that such an euill as this is may be more seuerely punished lette him that is such a one bee reiected from all communion euen such as Lay-men inioy To whom all the Bishoppes answered it pleaseth vs well To whom Hosius replyed Though any shall bee found so ill aduised as haply in excuse of himselfe to affirme that hee receiued letters from the people to draw him from his owne city to another yet I thinke seeing it is manifest that some few not sincere in the Faith might be corrupted by reward and procured to desire his translation all such fraudes should altogether bee condemned So that such a one should not bee admitted so much as to the communion which Lay-men enioy no not in the end which thing if it seeme good vnto you all confirme and settle it by your Decree And the Synode answered it pleaseth vs well Leo to the same purpose writeth thus If any Bishoppe despising the meanenesse of his owne citie shall seeke to gette the administration gouernment of some more noted and better respected place and shall by any meanes translate remoue himselfe to a greater People and more large and ample charge let him bee driuen from that other chaire which hee sought and lette him bee depriued also of his owne So that hee bee neither suffered to rule ouer them whom out of a couetous desire hee would haue subiected to himselfe nor ouer them whom g in pride hee contemned and scorned And the like is found in other but as Theodoret sheweth it was ambition and such other like euils that these Holy Fathers sought to stoppe and preuent rather then generally to condemne all Translation of Bishops from one Church and cittie to another For these changes may sometimes bring so great and euident vtility that they are not to be disliked And therefore the same Theodoret sheweth that notwithstanding this Canon Gregory Nazianzen was remoued from his Church and constituted Bishop of Constantinople And Socrates reporteth that Proclus was remoued thither from Cyzicum Wherefore passing by these matters as cleare and resolued of Let vs proceed to see first to whom it pertaineth to Elect Secondly to whom it belongeth to ordaine such as are duly elected and chosen to the worke of the Ministery Touching Election wee thinke that each Church and People that haue not by lawe custome or consent restrayned themselues stand free by Gods law to admitte maintaine and obey no man as their Pastor without their liking and that the peoples election by themselues or their rulers dependeth on the first principles of humane fellowships and assemblies for which cause though Bishops by Gods lawe haue power to examine and ordaine before any may be placed to take charge of soules yet haue they no power to impose a Pastor on any Church against their
wils nor to force them to yeeld obedience and maintenance to any without their liking And therefore anciently as LEO sheweth the custome was that hee should bee chosen of all that was to bee ouer all that the wishes and desires of the Cittizens should bee expected the Testimonies of the people should be sought the will and liking of the noble and honourable should be knowne and the Cleargy should choose All which thinges are wont to be obserued and kept in ordinations by them that know the rules of the Fathers that the rule of the Apostle may be followed in all things who prescribeth that hee who is to be ouer the Church should not onely haue the allowance of the faithfull giuing witnesse vnto him but the testimony also of them that are without and that no occasiō of any scandall may be left while he who is to be the Doctor ofpeace is ordained in peace and concord pleasing vnto God with the agreeing and consenting desires of all And in the same Epistle hee addeth Teneatur subscriptio Clericorum honoratorum testimonium ordinis consensus Plebis That is Let the subscription of the Cleargy be had the testimony of the honourable and the consent of the order and people Cyprian to the same purpose writeth thus The people beeing obedient to the precepts of the Lord and fearing God ought to seperate themselues from a sinnefull and wicked Ruler and not intermingle themselues or to haue any thing to do with the sacrifices of a sacrilegious Priest especially seeing they haue power eyther to chuse such Priestes as are worthy or to refuse such as are vnworthy And a little after in the same Epistle hee hath these words For which cause it is diligently to bee obserued and kept as from the tradition of God and the Apostles which thing also is obserued and kept with vs and almost throughout all Prouinces that for the due performance of the worke of Ordination when any Ruler and Gouernour is to be ordained the Bishops of the same Prouince which are nearest should come together vnto that people ouer whom he is to be sette and that the Bishoppe should be chosen in the presence of the people which most fully and perfectly knoweth the life of euery one and hath perceiued by their conuersation what kind of workes they are wont to do Which thing also we see to haue bin don in the Ordination of Sabinus our Colleague to wit that vpon the voyces of the whole brotherhood and the judgment of the Bishops which came together which sent their letters expressing their opiniō of him the Episcopall dignity was cōferred vpon him with the imposition of hands he was ordained into the voyd roome of Basilides That in the time of Chrysostome the people had interest in chusing their Pastors it is euident out of his booke of Priest-hood The Fathes of the Nicene Councell as wee finde in Theodoret write to the Church of Alexandria and to the beloued brethren of Egypt Lybia and Pent◅polis in this sort If haply any Bishop of the Church de fall asleepe let it be lawfull for such of the sect of Meletius as haue beene not long since restored to the Communion of the Church to succeede into the place of him that is dead if so be that they shall seeme to bee worthy and the people shall chuse them yet so notwithstanding that the voyce and consent of the Bishop of the Church of Alexandria bee added to seale and confirme the same And touching the election of Nectarius the Bishoppes of the first councell of Constantinople write thus Wee haue ordained the most reverend and beloued of God Nectarius Bishop before the whole Councell with all consent and agreement in the presence of Theodosius the Emperour beloued of God and of the whole cleargy the whole city likewise with vnanimous consentagreeing thereunto And Leo provideth and taketh order what shall bee done when they that should elect agree not His words are these When ye goe about the election of the chiefe Priest or Bishop let him be advanced before all vpon whom the consenting desires of the Cleargy and People concurre with one accord and if their voyces be divided betwixt twaine let him be preferred before the other in the iudgment of the Metropolitane which hath more voyces and merits but let none be ordained against their wils and petitions least the people despise or hate the Bishoppe which they neuer affected and lesse care for religion when their desires are not satisfied And Grego◅y the Bishoppe of Rome long after allowing the election by the people hath these wordes If it be true that the Bishop of Salona bee dead hasten to admonish the cleargy and people of that city to choose a Bishoppe with one consent that may bee ordained for them And to Magnus about the election of the Bishoppe of Millaine hee saith Warne the Cleargy and people that they dissent not in choosing their Priest but that with one accord they elect some one that may bee consecrated their Bishoppe By all which testimonies wee see what interest aunciently the people had in the choyce of their Bishops and how carefull good Bishops were that they should haue none thrust vpon them against their wills that they should proceede to election with one accord if it might bee or otherwise that such should be ordained as were desired by the greater part and that all things might be done peaceably and without tumult But how much in time they abused this their power it is too evident For Nazianzene reporting the choyce of Eusebius to bee Bishoppe of Caesarea sayth the Citty of Caesarea was in a tumult and the people divided about the choyce of their Bishoppe and the sedition was sharpe and hardly to bee appeased and that as men distracted in many mindes some proposing one and some another as is often seene in such cases at length the whole people agreeing on one of good calling among them commended for his life but not yet baptized tooke him against his will and with the helpe of a band of souldiers that was then come to the Citty placed him in the Bishops chaire and offered him to the Bishoppes present mixing threates with perswasions required to haue him ordained and pronounced their Bishop Likewise at Antioch as Eusebius reporteth there was raised a grieuous sedition about the deposing of Eustathius and after when another was to be chosen the flame therof so increased that it was like to haue consumed the whole city For the people being diuided into two parts the Magistrates of the citie supported the sides and bandes of souldiers were mustered as against an enemy and the matter had vndoubtedly beene tryed by the sword if God and the feare of the Emperour writing to them had not asswaged the rage of the multitude But howsoeuer such was the dissention that eight whole yeares the place was without a Bishop When
the Councell of Constance Wherefore seeing so many Councells Popes yeelded the power of electing or at least of allowing and confirming the Popes to the Emperours and seeing so good effects followed of it and so ill of the contrary there is no reason why our Aduersaries should dislike it For seeing the people aunciently had their consent in these affaires Fredericke the Emperour had reason when hee said that himselfe as King and ruler of the people ought to bee chiefe in choosing his owne Bishop Neither had the Emperours onely this right in disposing of the Bishopricke of Rome and other dignities Ecclesiasticall but other Christian Kings likewise had a principall stroake in the appointing of Bishops For as Nauclere noteth the French Kings haue had the right of Inuestitures euer since the time of Adrian the first and Duarenus sheweth that howsoeuer Ludouicus renounced the right of choosing the Bishop of Rome yet hee held still the right of Inuestiture of other Bishops into the place whereof came afterwards that right which the King vseth when in the vacancie of a Bishopricke hee giueth power to choose and some other royalties which the Kings of France still retaine It appeareth by the twelfth Councell of Toledo that the Kings had a principall stroake in elections in the Churches of Spaine and touching England Matthew Paris testifieth that Henry the first by William of Warnaste his agent protested to the Pope he would rather loose his kingdome then the right of Inuestitures and added threatning words to the same protestation Neither did he onely make verball protestations but hee really practised that hee spake and gaue the Arch bishopricke of Canterbury to Rodolphe Bishoppe of London inuesting him by Pastoral staffe ring Articuli cleri prescribe that elections shall be free frō force feare or intreaty of Secular powers yet so as that the Kings license bee first asked after the election done his royall assent and confirmation bee added to make it good Whereupon the Statute of prouisors of Benefices made at Westminster the fiue and twentith of Edward the third hath these wordes Our Soueraigne Lord the King and his heires shall haue and enioy for the time the collations to the Archbishoprickes and other dignities electiue which bee of his aduowry such as his progenitors had before free election was granted sith that the first elections were granted by the Kings progenitours vpon a certaine forme and condition as namely to demaund licence of the King to choose after choyce made to haue his royall assent Which condition being not kept the thing ought by reason to returne to his first nature So that we see that at first the Cleargy people were to choose their Bishops Ministers yet so that Princes by their right were to moderate things and nothing was to be done without them But when they endowed Churches with ample revenewes possessions disburdened the people of the charge of maintaining their Pastors they had now a farther reason to sway things then before And thence it is that the Statute aboue-mentioned saith the Kings gaue power of free elections yet vpon condition of seeking their licence confirmation as hauing the right of nomination in themselues in that they were Founders Likewise touching Presbyters the auncient Canon of the Councel of Carthage which was that Bishops should not ordain clearks without the consent of their Cleargie that also they should haue the assent and testimony of the Citizens held while the Cleargy liued together vpon the common contributions and divident but when not onely titles were divided distinguished and men placed in rurall Churches abroad but seuerall allowance made for the maintenance of such as should attend the seruice of God by the Lords of those Countrey townes out of their owne lands and the lands of their tennants they that thus carefully provided for the Church were much respected And it was thought fit they should haue great interest in the choosing and nominating of Clearkes in such places Iustinian the Emperour to reward such as had beene beneficiall in this sort to the Church and to incourage others to doe the like decreed That if any man build a Church or house of Prayer and would haue Clearkes to be placed there if hee allow maintenance for them and name such as are worthy they shall be ordained vpon his nomination But if he shall choose such as bee prohibited by the Canons as vnworthy the Bishop shall take care to promote some whom he thinketh more worthy And the Councell of Toledo about the yeare of Christ 655 made a Canon to the same effect The words of the councell are these We decree that as long as the Founders of Churches doe liue they shall be suffered to haue the chiefe and continuall care of the said Churches shall offer fit Rectors to the Bishop to be ordained And of the Bishop neglecting the Founders shall presume to place any others let him know that his admission shall be voyde and to his shame but if such as they choose be prohibited by the Canons as vnworthy then let the Bishop take care to promote some whom he thinketh more worthy Whereby we see what respect was anciently had to such as founded Churches gaue lands and possessions to the same yet were they not called Lords of such places after such dedication to God but Patrons onely because they were to defend the rights thereof and to protect such as there attended the seruice of God though they had right to nominate men to serue in these places yet might they not judge or punish them if they neglected their duties but onely complaine of them to the Bishop or Magistrate Neither might they dispose of the possessions thus giuen to the Church and dedicated to God but if they fell into poverty they were to be maintained out of the revenewes thereof This power and right of nomination and presentation resting in Princes and other Founders can no way prejudice or hurt the state of the Church if Bishops to whō examination and ordination pertaineth doe their duties in refusing to consecrate ordaine such as the Canons prohibite but very great confusions did follow the Popes intermeddling in bestowing Church-liuings and dignities as wee shall soone finde if wee looke into the practise of them in former times CHAP. 55. Of the Popes disordered intermedling with the elections of Bishoppes and other Ministers of the Church their vsurpation intrusion and preiudicing the right and liberty of others THe Popes informer times greatly preiudiced the right and liberty of other men and hurt the estate of the Church of God three waies first by giuing priuiledges to Fryers a people vnknowne to all antiquity to enter into the Churches and charges of other men to do Ministeriall acts and to get vnto themselues those things which of right should haue beene yeelded to other Secondly by Commendams and Thirdly by reseruations
or consent to them that so doe the care of the church is devolued to the Presbyters remaining Catholicke and as in the case of necessity they may doe all other things regularly reserued to Bishops only as Ambrose sheweth that the Presbyters of Egypt were permitted in some cases to confirme the baptized which thing also Gregory after him durst not condemne So in case of Generall defect of the Bishops of a whole countrey refusing to ordaine any but such as shall consent to their Heresies when there appeareth no hope of remedy or helpe from other parts of the Church the Presbyters may chuse out one among themselues to be chiefe and so adde other to their numbers by the imposition of his and their hands This I haue proued in my third booke out of the authorities of Armachanus and sundry other of whom Alexander of Hales speaketh To which wee may adde that which Durandus hath where he saith That Hierome seemeth to haue beene of opinion that the highest power of consecration or order is the power of a Priest or Elder So that euery Priest in respect of his Priestly power may minister all Sacraments confirme the baptized and giue all Orders howsoeuer for the avoydiug of the perill of Schisme it was ordained that one should bee chosen to haue a preheminence aboue the rest who was named a Bishop and to whom it was peculiarly reserued to giue Orders and to doe some such other things And afterwards he saith that Hierome is clearely of this opinion Neither can the Romanists deny this justifie their owne practise For their Chorepiscopi or Titular Bishops are no Bishops as I haue proued at large out of Damasus not disputing or giuing his private opiniō but resoluing the point and prescribing to other what they must beleeue practise yet doe they of the Church of Rome permit these to ordaine not onely Sub-deacons and other inferiour Cleargy-men but Priests and Deacons also and holde their Ordinations to be good and of force If any man haply say that 〈◊〉 Bishop when he is old and weake or otherwise imployed may haue a Coadiutor and consequently that it is no such absurdity to admit these Suffragan and Titular Bishops and that therefore they may haue power to ordaine as being truely Bishops and yet Presbyters in no case bee permitted so to doe for answer herevnto let him reade what I haue written in the 29. chapter of this booke concerning this matter CHAP. 57. Of the things required in such as are to be ordained Ministers and of the lawfulnesse of their Marriage FRom the election and ordination of Ministers we are to proceede to the things required in them that are to be chosen and ordayned If any man saith the Apostle desire the office of a Bishop he desireth a worthy worke A Bishop therefore must be vnreproueable the husband of one wife watching sober modest harberous apt to teach not giuen to wine no striker not giuen to filthy lucre but gentle no fighter not couetous no young scholler but well reported of euen of those that are without The canons of the church require the same things and adde some other as that no man may be chosen and ordained a Minister of the Word and Sacraments till he be thirty yeares of age nor none that was baptized in his bed and the like The Papists proceed further and not contenting themselues with the moderation of the Apostle and the Primitiue Fathers admit none into the holy Ministery but those that are vnmarried or being married promise to liue frō their wiues yet not so neither if either they haue beene twice married or if they married with a widow Wherefore letting passe the things the Apostle prescribeth and those other which the Canons adde of which there is no question let vs come to the marriage of them that are to bee admitted into the holy Ministery of the Church It is clearely confessed by the best learned in the Romane Church that Bishops Presbyters and other Cleargy-men are not forbidden to marry or being married before they enter into the Ministery to continue in matrimoniall society with their wiues by any law of God and therefore there is little feare of offending against God eyther by admitting such into the Ministery as will not liue single or by entring into it with purpose of marriage Non est essentialiter annexum debitum continentiae ordini sacro sayth Aquinas sed ex statuto Ecclesiae vnde uidetur quod per Ecclesiam possit dispensari in voto continentiae solemnizato per susceptionem sacri ordinis that is It is not essentially annexed vnto holy order that men should containe and liue single that enter into the Ministry but by the Decree of the Church onely So that it seemeth that the Church may dispence in the vow of continency though made solemne by taking holy orders And in another place hee sayth that it is from the Churches constitution that they who are entred into the holy orders of the Church may not marry which yet is not the same among the Graecians that it is among the Latines For the Graecians make no vow and do liue with their wiues that they married before they entred into orders of the same opinion is Bonauentura who acknowledgeth that in the Primitiue Church it was otherwise touching this matter then now it is in the Church of Rome and endeauoureth to giue reasons of the difference Scotus and Occam are of the same iudgement and all the rest of the Schoole men of note agree with them And Caietane a great learned Diuine and a Cardinall in our time pronounceth confidently that it cannot be proued either by reason or authority setting aside the Lawes that are positiue and vowes which men make to the contrary that a Priest doth sinne in contracting marriage And that therefore the Pope with good conscience may dispense with such a one and giue him leaue to marry though there be no inducement of publike profit or benefit leading him so to do And addeth that reason seemeth to bee strong on the contrary side for the lawfulnesse of such dispensation because as it appeareth by Peter Lombard in the fourth of the Sentences neyther Order in that it is Order nor holy Order in that it is holy crosseth or hindereth marriage And as it is in the Decrees Deacons in auncient times might marry euen in the West Church and as it is in the same Decrees they of the East Church are ioyned in marriage euen after they are entered into holy Orders Neither is that glosse to bee admitted which expoundeth their coupling or ioyning in marriage of the liuing in marriage formerly contracted Seeing the whole course coherence of the Text speaketh of the Contract of Marriage as by the opposition of the practise of the West Church the Priests whereof are saide not to marry it may bee confirmed These are the wordes of
had bin twice maried frâ—… entring into the Ministery had no good reason leading them so to doe For neither is he alwaies better that hath beene but once maried then he that hath beene twice maried as I haue shewed out of Hierome neither canne he alwayes better exhort to continence for how canne hee exhort others to liue continently and not to marry the second time or after the death of their wiues that himselfe in his widow-hood committed Adultery or liued as a whore-monger seeing the Apostle willeth both men and women rather to marry the second third or fourth time then to burne in lust and to commit adultery or fornication There is therefore a third reason yeelded of this pretended prohibition of marying a second wife after the death of the first which is mysticall and taken from a kinde of Sacramentall signification which must be found in them that are to be admitted into the holy Ministery of the Church And surely either this reason must preuaile or none for if it were some morall defect and imperfection that debarreth men twice maried from entering into the Ministery or for that it is a signe of incontinency to haue beene twice maried it might be washed away in Baptisme as well as Whoredome and other Crimes which yet these men deny Let vs see therefore what force there is in this Reason of mysticall signification The mariage of the Fathers in the time of the old Law saith Saint Augustine by their many wiues expressed and figured those Churches out of the many Nations People and Kinreds of the world that were to ioyne themselues vnto Christ in Spirituall mariage at his comming but the mariage of Christians figureth specially that perfect vnity that shall bee in Heauen of all faithfull and holy ones both with Christ and amongst themselues This is Augustines reason and this the Schoole-men vrge But it is strange that men of Learning should stand so confidently vpon so weake a ground For if the expressing of the vnity betweene Christ and the Church his Spouâ—…e by the vndeuided vnity that is betweene one man and one woman be necessarily required in him that is to be chosen a Bishop or Presbyter then of necessity every one that desireth to be a Bishop or Presbyter must marry a wife that so his mariage may expresse the Spirituall mariage betweene Christ and the Church Nay seeing Christ neuer withdraweth himselfe from his Church but daily begetteth sons and daughters of her vnto God each Bishop must haue a wife and company with her continually that so by the matrimoniall vnity that is betweene him and his wife hee may expresse the vnity that is betweene Christ and the Church Their answere hereunto is that as Christ is a Husband so hee is a Virgin and that therefore a man may beare an expresse resemblance and representation of Christ by Virginity as well as by Mariage So that it sufficeth if either hee bee a Virgin or haue beene but once maried that is to be thought capable of Ecclesiasticall honour But this answere vvill not serue the turne For though a man bee no Virgin as Hierome professed of himselfe that hee vvas not and as it is euident Augustine vvas not in that he had children borne vnto him yet it is not necessary in the iudgement of our Aduersaries that such a one should marry a vvife to make himselfe capable of Ecclesiasticall honour Whence it followeth that there is no necessity of Representing either the Virginity of Christ or his matrimoniall Coniunction vvith the Church by the Virginity or mariage of such as are to be admitted into the holy Ministery Besides this it is not enough to expresse the Vnity betweene Christ and the Church that a man marry but one vvife but it is required also that he defile not himselfe by being ioyned vnto harlots but that he keepe himselfe intirely to his owne vvife For so it is betweene Christ and his Church vvho not onely hath no other wife or spouse but the Church of the faithfull but also so intirely loueth her that hee giueth no part of his loue to any stranger So that hee that marying but once hath either before or after such mariage committed adultery or fornication doth not expresse the vnity that is betweene Christ and the Church And yet our Aduersaries that are so peremptorie against such as haue beene more then once maried set open the doores to let in both Whoremongers and Adulterers into the Church and house of God And therefore the wordes of Hierome may rightly be applyed vnto them That they tithe Mint and Annisseed and omitte the weightier things of the Law that they straine at a Gnat and swallow a Camell rejecting them as vnworthy that haue not offended and admitting such as haue justifying the sinner and condemning the Innocent But that wee may perceiue the weakenesse of this mysticall Reason wee must obserue that our adversaries admit none into the Ministery that haue beene maried vnlesse either their wiues bee dead or by consent of their wiues they resolue to containe renouncing that power and interest the man hath ouer the body of his wife and so indeed ceasing to bee husbands So that if their Presbyters and other Cleargy-men haue resemblance of CHRISTS mariage with the Church in respect of their mariage it is while they are no Cleargy-men but meere Laymen Now how-soeuer it may be required of them that are to bee admitted into the Ministery that they haue not beene scandalous before their enterance yet I thinke it is not required that they haue beene cleare representations or figures of CHRIST but this is to bee looked for afterwardes when they supply his place Wherefore wee may assure our selues that this was not the reason that moued those to debarre men twice maryed from entering into the Ministery that so did but partly a mis-vnderstanding of the Apostles words partly for that as Duarenus noteth though often marying bee permitted both by Gods Law and mans Law yet the olde Fathers did not greatly like it as arguing immoderate incontinency in them that so doe Whereupon we shall finde that in auncient times they were all put to penance that maryed the 2d time though Lay-men and neuer intending to enter into the Ministery The wordes of the Councell of Neocaesarea are these Concerning such as often take them wiues and such as are often marryed it is ordered that they shall obserue and fulfill the time of the penance which is prescribed vnto them yet so as that their conversation and faith may shorten the time And the same Councell forbiddeth a Presbyter to bee present at the mariage-feast of them that are the second time maryed seeing it is prescribed that they must bee put to Penance that marry the second time And asketh what Presbyter that is that will for a mariage-feast consent to such mariages And another Canon forbiddeth such mariages to be blessed in the Church
Christ without being beholding to Peter for it or inferiour to him in it but by vertue of their Bishoply authority and offīce which they receiued from Peter Alioqui enim sayth Bellarmine cum omnes Apostoli plurimos Episcopos in varijs locis constituerint si Apostoli ipsi non sint facti Episcopi à Petro certè maxima pars Episcoporum nondeducit originem suam à Petro that is For otherwise seeing all the Apostles constituted exceeding many Bishops in diuerse places if the Apostles themselues were not made Bishops by Peter certainely the greatest part of Bishoppes will not fetch their originall from Peter This his fancie of Peters making the other Apostles Bishoppes immediately after as his manner is like an honest man hee contradicteth confessing that the Apostles were all Bishops and the first Bishops of the Church in that they were Apostles without any such ordination Omnes Apostoli sayth he fuerunt Episcopi imò etiam primi Episcopi Ecclesiae tametsi non sunt ordinati that is All the Apostles were Bishops nay which more is the first Bishops of the Church without any other or new ordination besides their Apostolique mission and calling And in another place he pronoūceth perēptorily that by vertue of these words As my Father sēt me so sēd I you the Apostles were made Vicars of Christ nay that they receiued the very offīce authority of Christ and that in the Apostolique power all Ecclesiasticall power is contained and though in the former place he sayd expressely Non eo ipso quòd aliquis est Apostolus est Episcopus that is A man is not therefore a Bishop because an Apostle for the twelue were Apostles before they were either Bishops or Priests yet in the later place hee sayth it is not to be maruailed at that they were Apostles before the passīon of Christ and yet neither Priests nor Bishops for that the Lord at diuerse times gaue the Apostles diuerse kindes and degrees of power but especiallie in the twentith of Iohn perfected that hee beganne before his passīon Soe that an Apostle perfectly constituted and authorised hath both Priestlie and Episcopall dignitic and power though in the beginning when the Apostles were rather designed then fully constituted not hauing receiued their full Commissīon they vvere neither Priests nor Bishoppes But to leaue BELLARMINE lost in these mazes it is most easie demonstratiuely to proue that the Apostles in that they were Apostles perfectly and fully constituted had both Priestlie and Bishoply dignity and power in most eminent sort For did not CHRIST giue the Apostles power to doe any Ecclesiasticall act that a Bishoppe can doe Did hee not giue them power to preach and baptize vvhen hee sayd vnto them Go teach all nations Baptizing them c to minister the holy Eucharist vvhen hee sayd Doe this as est as ye shall doe it in remembrance of mee Did hee not giue them the power of the Keyes of binding loosing of remitting retaining sinnes consequently all that commeth within the compasse of Ecclesiasticall office and Ministerie doubtlesse hee did Neither is there any that dareth to deny any part of that which hath beene saide And therefore it is an idle fansie that Peter made the rest of his fellowes Bishops the Apostolique power implying in it eminently Episcopall as the greater the lesser But they will say Peter made Iames the lesser Bishop of Hierusalem Indeed Baronius falsifieth Chrysostome and maketh him say that the Doctour of the world made Iames Bishop of Hierusalem whereas hee saith no such thing but asking the question why Peter whom Christ so much fauoured was not preferred to bee Bishop of Hierusalem answereth that Christ made him Doctour of the world which was a greater honour then to haue beene fastened to the Church of Hierusalem to haue beene set in the Episcopall Throne there But it is cleare by the testimonies of Antiquity that Peter Iames the greater Iohn ordained Iames Bishop of Hierusalem So saith Anacletus in his second Epistie if any credit be to be giuen vnto it where hee hath these words A Bishop must be ordained of three Bishops as Peter Iames the greater and Iohn ordained Iames the lesser Bishop of Hierusalem Clemens Alexandrinus also as we reade in Eusebius saith the very same and Hierome de viris illustribus attributeth the ordaining of Iames not to Peter alone but to the Apostles His words are Iacobus statim post passionem Domini ab Apostolis Hierosolymorum Episcopus ordinatur that is Iames presently after the passion of the Lord is ordained Bishop of Hierusalem by the Apostles If any man aske how the Apostles did ordaine or make Iames being an Apostle a Bishop if the Apostolique office imply in it the office and dignitie of a Bishop as the greater the lesser we answere that a Bishop differing from an Apostle as in other things so in this that he is fixed to some certaine place whereof specially hee taketh the care whereas the care imployment of an Apostle is more at large When the Apostles after the conversion of Nations and people began to retire themselues to certaine places there to rest and specially to take care thereof they were in that respect rather Bishops then Apostles and in this sort Iames the lesser being appointed by the Apostles to make his principall abode at Hierusalem a chiefe city of the world whence the faith spread it selfe into all other parts and more specially to take care thereof is rightly said to haue beene constituted Bishop of that place by them not as if they had giuen him any new power and authority that he had not before or not in so perfect sort but that they limited and restrained him more specially to one certaine place where he should vse the same The place in the Acts maketh nothing for the confirmation of the Popish errour for Paul and Barnabas formerly designed by Christ to be Apostles were againe by the ministerie of Prophets revealing the will and pleasure of Almighty GOD separated more specially to bee Apostles of the Gentiles and put forth into that employment with fasting prayer and imposition of hands not thereby receiuing any new power but a speciall limitation and assignation of those parts of the world wherein principally they should be employed Besides these were not Apostles but Prophets such as Agabus was that are mentioned in this place inferiour in degree to Apostles and such as might not make an Apostle to be a Bishop but did onely signifie and reueale what the will of God was and whither he meant to send these worthy Apostles and so with prayer and fasting commended them to the grace of God and therefore this place maketh nothing for proofe of Peters ordaining and appointing the rest of the Apostles to be Bishops CHAP. 24. Of the preeminence that Peter had amongst the Apostles and the reason why Christ directed his speeches specially
to him THAT there was no more power and authoritie in Peter then in any of the rest I hope it appeareth by that which hath beene said and therefore it remaineth that now wee examine what was the reason why so many thinges were specially spoken to him why so many wayes hee may seeme to haue beene preferred before the rest and what in trueth and in deede his preeminence and primacie was Touching the speeches of Christ for the most part specially directed to Peter it is most certaine by that which hath beene said that they did giue no singular and speciall power to Peter that was not giuen to euery of the rest And therefore the Diuines doe obserue the difference of the speeches of Christ and note that Christ sometimes directed his speech to particular men precisely in their owne persons as in the remission of sinnes healing the sicke and raising the dead sometimes in the person of all or many others as when he saith Goe and sinne no more which hee is intended to haue done so often as there is the same reason of speaking a thing to one and to others as when a man is induced to doe or not to doe a thing to beleeue or not to beleeue a thing which other in like sort are bound to doe or not to doe to beleeue or not to beleeue as well as hee So it being as necessary for one to watch as another Christ saith That I say vnto you I say vnto all Watch. And so here seeing it is confessed and proued by our Aduersaries themselues that there was nothing promised or performed to Peter that was not in like sort intended vnto and bestowed on euery of the rest it must be graunted that what he spake to him he meant to all and would haue his words so vnderstood and taken The reason why more specially notwithstanding this his generall intendment he directed his speech to Peter then to any of the rest was either because he was more auncient and more ardent in charitie then the rest thereby to signifie what manner of men they should be that should be chosen Pastours of the Church namely men of ripe age and confirmed judgement and full of charitie or lest hee might seeme to bee despised for his deniall of Christ which the Glosse seemeth to import when it saith Trinae negationi redditur trina confessio ne minus amori lingua seruiat quám timori that is Therefore he was induced by Christ thrice solemnly to protest and professe his loue vnto him as he had thrice denied him that his tongue might shew it selfe no lesse seruiceable vnto loue that rested in him then it had done vnto feare or else because he first confessed Christ to bee the Sonne of the liuing God consubstantiall with his Father because he was much conuersant with Christ and acquainted with his secrets counsels or lastly because Christ meant there should bee a certaine order amongst the guides of his Church and some to whom the rest in all places should resort in all matters of importance as to such as are more honourable then other of the same ranke degree who are first to be consulted from whom all actions must take their beginning therefore he so specially spake to Peter whom hee meant in this sort to set before the rest Thus then there is a primacie of power when one hath power to doe that act of ministerie another hath not or not without his consent and when one may by himselfe limite restraine or hinder another in the performance of the acts of ministery and such primacie wee haue shewed not to haue beene in Peter But there is another of order honour which he had whereby he had the first place the first and best employment the calling together of the rest in cases where a concurrence of many was required as for the better sorting out of the worke they had in hand the ioynt decreeing of things to be euery where alike beleeued and practised and in these assemblies thus called the sitting speaking first the moderation and direction of each mans speaking and the publishing and pronouncing of the conclusion agreed vpon if so he pleased In this sense Cyprian saith Erant vtique caeteri Apostoli quod fuit Petrus pari consortio praediti honoris potestatis fed exordium ab vnitate proficiscitur that is The other Apostles doubtlesse were that which Peter was hauing the same fellowship both of power and honour but the beginning proceedeth from vnity that the Church may be shewed to be one And in the same sense Hierome saith against Iouinian Thou wilt say the Church is founded vpon Peter it is true it is so and yet in another place the same frame of the Church is raised vpon all the Apostles and all receiue the keyes of the kingdome of heauen and the firmenesse of the Church stayeth it selfe equally vpon them all but therefore doth Christ more specially promise to build his Church vpon Peter that hee being constituted and appointed head chiefe amongst them all occasion of Schisme might bee taken away To the same purpose it is that Leo writeth to Anastasius where hee saith Inter beatissimos Apostolos in similitudine honor is fuit quaedam discretio potestatis cum omnium par esset electio vni tamen datum est vt caeteris preemineret that is Amongst the most blessed Apostles like in honour there was a certaine difference of power and when all were equally elected yet it was giuen to one to haue a preeminence amongst the rest In which saying of Leo that it bee not contrary to that of Cyprian who saith that the Apostles were companions and consorts equall both in honour power wee must not vnderstand that one Apostle had more power then another or that power another had not but that in the same power one was so before the rest that hee was the partie to whom they were to resort and without consulting whom first and before all other they might attempt nothing generally concerning the state of the whole Church by vertue of this power In which sense he saith in another place Petro praecaeteris soluendi ligandi tradita est potestas that is The power of binding and loosing was so giuen to Peter that therein hee was before the rest and againe Siquid cum eo commune caeteris Christus voluit esse principibus nunquam nisi per ipsum Petrum dedit quicquidaliis non negavit that is If Christ would haue any thing to be common to the rest of the Princes that is Apostles with Peter he neuer gaue that which he vouchsafed vnto them any otherwise then as by Peter which words must not so bee vnderstood as if Peter had first receiued the fulnesse of power and others from him for all the Apostles receiued their power and commission immediatly from Christ not from Peter as I haue largely
alleaged by Cusanus and greatly approued yea the same Cusanus complaining of the abuses of the Court of Rome in that thinges are carried thither that should bee determined in the Prouinces where they beginne in that the Pope intermedleth in giuing Benefices before they be voide to the preiudice of the originall Patrons by reason whereof young men run to Rome and spend their best time there carrying gold with them and bringing backe nothing but paper and many like confusions which the Canons forbid and neede reformation addeth that the common saying that the secular power may not restraine or alter these courses brought in by Papall authority should not moue any man for that though the power of temporall Princes ought not to change any thing established canonically for the honour of GOD and good of such as attend his seruice yet it may and ought to prouide for the common good and see that the auncient canons be obserued Neither ought any one to say that the auncient christian Emperours did erre that made so many sacred constitutions or that they ought not so to haue done For saith he I read that Popes haue desired them for the common good to make lawes for the punishment of offences committed by those of the cleargie And if any one shall say that the force of all these constitutions depended vpon Papall or Synodall approbation I will not insist vpon it though I haue read and collected foure score and sixe chiefe heads of Ecclesiasticall rules and lawes made by old Emperours and many other made by Charles the Great and his successours in which order is taken not onely concerning others but euen concerning the Bishoppe of Rome himselfe and other Patriarches what they shall take of the Bishoppes they ordaine and many like things and yet did I neuer finde that the Pope was desired to approue them or that they haue no binding force but by vertue of his approbation But I know right well that some Popes haue professed their due regarde of those Imperiall and Princely constitutions But though it were graunted that those constitutions had no further force then they receiued from the canons wherein the same thinges were formerly ordered or from Synodall approbation yet might the Emperor now reforme things amisse by vertue of old canons and Princes constitutions grounded on them Yea if hee should with good aduice considering the decay of piety and diuine worshippe the ouerflowing of all wickednes and the causes and occasions thereof recall the old canons and the auncient and most holy obseruation of the Elders and reiect whatsoever priuiledges exemptions or new deuices contrary therevnto by vertue whereof suites complaintes and controuersies the gifts and donations of benefices the like thinges are vnjustly brought to Rome to the great prejudice of the whole Christian Church I thinke no man could justly blame him for so doing Yea he saith the Emperour Sigismund had an intention so to doe and exhorteth him by no fained allegations of men fauouring present disorders to bee discouraged for that there is no way to preserue the peace of the Church whatsoeuer some pretend to the contrary vnlesse such lewde and wicked courses proceeding from ambition pride and couetousnesse be stopped and the old canons reuiued From that which hath beene obserued touching the proceeding of Christian Kings and Emperours in former times in calling Councels in being present at them and in making lawes for persons and causes Ecclesiasticall it is easie to gather what the power of Princes is in this kinde and that they are indeede supreame Gouernours ouer all persons and in all causes as well Ecclesiasticall as Ciuill which is that wee attribute to our Kings Queenes and the Papistes so much stumble at as if some new and strange opinion were broached by vs. Wherefore for the satisfaction of all such as are not maliciously obstinate refusing to heare what may be said I will endeauour in this place vpon so fitte an occasion to cleare whatsoeuer may bee questionable in this point will first intreat of the power and right that Princes haue in causes Ecclesiasticall then of that they haue ouer persons Ecclesiastical jn treating of causes Ecclesiasticall I will first distinguish the diversities of them the power of medling with them Causes Ecclesiasticall therefore are of two sorts for some are originally and naturally such and some onely in that by fauor of Princes out of due consideration they are referred to the Cognisance of Ecclesiasticall persons as fittest Iudges as the probations of the Testaments of them that are dead the disposition of the goods of them that dye intestat and if there be any other like Causes Ecclesiasticall of the first sort are either meerely and onely Ecclesiasticall and Spirituall or mixt Meerely Ecclesiasticall are of three sorts First matters of Faith and Doctrine Secondly matters of Sacraments and the due administration of them Thirdly the orders degrees ordination of such as attend the Ministery of the word Sacraments Mixtly Ecclesiasticall are of two sorts either such as in one respect belong to one kinde of cognisance and in another to another as marriages which are subiect to ciuill disposition in that they are politicall contracts and to spirituall in that they are ordered by the diuine law or such as are equally censurable by Ciuill Ecclesiasticall authority as murthers adulteries blasphemies the like All which in the time when there is no Christian Magistrate or when there is ouer-great negligence in the ciuill Magistrate are to bee punished by the spirituall guides of the Church Whereupon wee shall finde that the auncient Councels prescribed penance to offenders in all these kindes But when there is a Christian Magistrate doing his duty they are to bee referred specially either to the one or the other of these and accordingly to bee censured by the one or the other as wee see the punishment of adultery vsury and things of that nature is referred to Ecclesiasticall persons the punishment of murther theft the like to the ciuill Magistrate This distinction of causes Ecclesiasticall premised it is easie to see what authority Princes haue in causes Ecclesiasticall For first touching those causes that are Ecclesiastical onely in that they are put ouer to the cognisance of spiritual persons there is no question but that the Prince hath a supreame power and that no man may meddle with them any otherwise then as he is pleased to allow And likewise touching those things which in one respect pertaine to ciuill jurisdictiō in another to spiritual or which are equally censurable by both there is no question but that the Prince hath supreame power in that they pertaine to ciuill jurisdiction So that the onely question is touching things naturally and meerely spiritual The power in these is of two sorts of Order of Iurisdiction The power of Order is the authority to preach the Word minister the Sacraments to ordaine Ministers
to doe all these things this power the Princes of the World haue not at all much lesse the supreame authority to doe these things but it is proper to the Ministers of the church And if Princes meddle in this kinde they are like to Vzziah that offered to burne incense for which he was stricken with Leprosie The power of Iurisdiction standeth first in prescribing making Lawes Secondly in hearing examining and judging of opinions touching matters of Faith And thirdly in judging of things pertaining to Ecclesiastical order ministery and the due performance of Gods diuine worship seruice Touching the first the making of a Law is the prescribing of a thing vnder some paine or punishment which hee that so prescribeth hath power to inflict Whence it is consequent that the Prince hauing no power to excommunicate put from the Sacraments and deliuer to Satan can of himselfe make no canons such as Councels of Bishoppes doe who commaund or forbid things vnder paine of excōmunication and like spiritual censures but hauing power of life and death of imprisonment banishment confiscation of goods and the like he may with the advice and direction of his Cleargy commaund things pertaining to Gods worship and seruice vnder these paines both for profession of Faith ministration of Sacraments and conversation fitting to Christians in general or men of Ecclesiastical order in particular by his Princely power establish things formerly defined and decreed against whatsoeuer errour and contrary ill-custome and obseruation And herein hee is so far forth supreame that no Prince Prelate or Potentate hath a commaunding authority ouer him yet doe we not whatsoeuer our clamorous Aduersaries vntruly report to make us odious make our Princes with their Ciuill States supreame in the power of commanding in matters concerning God and his Faith and religion without seeking the direction of their Cleargy for the Statute that restored the title of Supremacie to the late Queene Elizabeth of famous and blessed memory prouideth that none shall haue authority newly to judge any thing to be Heresie not formerly so iudged but the high Court of Parliament with the assent of the Cleargy in their Conuocation nor with them soe as to command what they thinke fitte without aduising with others partakers of like precious Faith with them when a more generall meeting for farther deliberation may bee had or the thing requireth it Though when no such generall concurrence may bee had they may by themselues prouide for those parts of the Church that are vnder them From the power and authority wee giue our Princes in making lawes and prescribing how men shall professe and practise touching matters of Faith and Religion let vs proceed to treat of the other part of power ascribed vnto them which is in judging of errors in Faith disorders or faults in things pertaining to Ecclesiasticall order and ministery according to former determinations and decrees And first touching errors in faith or aberrations in the performance of Gods worship and seruice there is no question but that Bishops and Pastors of the Church to whom it pertaineth to teach the trueth are the ordinary and fittest Iudges and that ordinarily and regularly Princes are to leaue the iudgement thereof vnto them But because they may faile either through negligence ignorance or mallice Princes hauing charge ouer Gods people and beeing to see that they serue and worship him aright are to iudge and condemne them that fall into grosse errours contrary to the common sence of Christians or into any other heresies formerly condemned And though there be no generall fayling yet if they see violent and partiall courses taken they may interpose themselues to stay them and cause a due proceeding or remoue the matter from one company and sort of Iudges to another And hereunto the best learned in former times agreed clearely confessing that when some thing is necessary to be done and the ordinary guides of the Church do faile or are not able to yeeld that helpe that is needfull wee may lawfully flye to other for reliefe and helpe when these two things do meete in the state of the Church sayth Waldensis to witte extreame necessity admitting no delay and the want of ability to yeeld reliefe in the ordinary Pastor or Guide wee must seeke an extraordinary Father and Patron rather then suffer the frame fabricke and building of the Lord Christ to bee dissolued If any man happily say that Ambrose a most worthy Bishop refused to come to the Court to be judged in a matter of faith by Valentinian the Emperour and asked when euer hee heard that Emperours iudged Bishops in matters of faith seeing if that were granted it would follow that Lay-men should dispute and debate matters and Bishoppes heare yea that Bishoppes should learne of Lay-men whereas contrarywise if wee looke ouer the Scriptures and consider the course of times past wee shall finde that Bishoppes haue iudged of Emperours in matters of faith and not Emperours of Bishoppes and that therefore it cannot bee without vsurpation of that which no way pertaineth to them that Princes should at all medle with the iudging of matters of faith This obiection what shew soeuer it may seeme to carry is easily answered for first the thing that Valentinian took on him was not to iudge according to former definitions but he would haue iudged of a thing already resolued on in a generall Councell called by Constantine the Emperor as if it had bin free and not yet indged of at all whereas we do not attribute to our Princes with their Ciuill Estates power newly to adiudge any thing to be heresie without the concurrēce of the State of their Clergy but only to Iudge in those matters of faith that are resolued on according to former resolutiōs And besides this Valentinian was known to be partiall he was but a nouice and the other iudges he ment to associate tohimselfe suspected therefore Ambrose had reason to do as he did Wherefore let vs proceed to the other part of the power of jurisdictiō that cōsisteth in iudging of things pertaining to Ecclesiastical Order Ministery Concerning which point first it is resolued that none may ordaine any to serue in the worke of the Ministery but the spirituall Pastours and Guides of the church Secondly that none may judicially degrade or put any one lawfully admitted from his degree and order but they alone Neither doe our Kings or Queenes challenge any such thing to themselues but their power standeth first in calling together the Bishoppes and Pastours of the Church for the hearing determining of such things and in taking all due care that all thinges bee done orderly in such proceedings without partiality violence or precipitation according to the Canons and Imperiall lawes made to confirme the same Secondly when they see cause in taking things from those whom they iustly suspect or others except against and appointing others in their places Thirdly